Goldmans Sue

[jotun]

ALL

I have wondered if Mr. Fred Goldman has a legal position as a creditor in the LBA bankruptcy filing in Florida. If anyone has any information on this issue and would like to share, please do. I have looked but found nothing so far.
Martin II

Martin,
I have found nothing either.
No lawyer has been invited to talk on tv, now that O.J. has WON. Total silence from the media once again. No shows, no ticker, no nothing.We know Yale would be glad to talk,like he "crows" to Newsweek. He didn't seem to think fred would get anything.

Maybe something is brewing.
If 'Harper Collins' was smart they would go back to the orginal deal. While they still have the rights.Since fred NOW thinks the public should read "IF I DID IT."

jotun

[martin II]

Martin,
I have found nothing either.
No lawyer has been invited to talk on tv, now that O.J. has WON. Total silence from the media once again. No shows, no ticker, no nothing.We know Yale would be glad to talk,like he "crows" to Newsweek. He didn't seem to think fred would get anything.

Maybe something is brewing.
If 'Harper Collins' was smart they would go back to the orginal deal. While they still have the rights.Since fred NOW thinks the public should read "IF I DID IT."

jotun

jotun

Fred has not been on his regular weekly LKL show crying either. Maby he is afraid Larry will ask the magic question 'WHY THE CHANGE OF HEART ABOUT THE BOOK"?

MARTIN ii

[martin II]

Martin,
I have found nothing either.
No lawyer has been invited to talk on tv, now that O.J. has WON. Total silence from the media once again. No shows, no ticker, no nothing.We know Yale would be glad to talk,like he "crows" to Newsweek. He didn't seem to think fred would get anything.

Maybe something is brewing.
If 'Harper Collins' was smart they would go back to the orginal deal. While they still have the rights.Since fred NOW thinks the public should read "IF I DID IT."

jotun

JOTUN

Yale does a good job of giving MrGoldmans lawyers and the media a lot of MISDIRECTION on purpose.

[socaldiva]

jotun

Fred has not been on his regular weekly LKL show crying either. Maby he is afraid Larry will ask the magic question 'WHY THE CHANGE OF HEART ABOUT THE BOOK"?

MARTIN ii

I find it appalling that you mock a father who would cry over the loss of his murdered Son. Fred has never appeared on a weekly basis as you claim here. He is seldom on. Fred has survived the murder of his beloved Son, I seriously doubt that he is 'AFRAID' of any QUESTION LK would have.

[socaldiva]

JOTUN

Yale does a good job of giving MrGoldmans lawyers and the media a lot of MISDIRECTION on purpose.


How do you know what Gallanter does? Do you have insider information as to his thought process & intent?

[fbgweezer]

I find it appalling that you mock a father who would cry over the loss of his murdered Son. Fred has never appeared on a weekly basis as you claim here. He is seldom on. Fred has survived the murder of his beloved Son, I seriously doubt that he is 'AFRAID' of any QUESTION LK would have.

LOL -- he's simply trolling for reactions. The board has been quiet and he knows that the victims and families have defenders on the ready. Some posters think it is a sport to take pot shots at the victims and families.

[socaldiva]

LOL -- he's simply trolling for reactions. The board has been quiet and he knows that the victims and families have defenders on the ready. Some posters think it is a sport to take pot shots at the victims and families.

I guess so. I hope the victim bashing on this board is remedied soon.

[martin II]

Mr Fred Goldman does not have a weekly program on the LKL show.But he is a frequent guest on this show giving his views on the case, his efforts to extract money from Mr Simpson and recently talking about his efforts in the LBA 'IF I DID IT' book"

What is different is that since LBA stopped the planned auction of the book rights, he has not been seen on LKL.

Mr Goldman has made himself a public figure and therefore it is expected and acceptable that people comment on his actions on the GOLDMAN SUE thread. Because some posters views are different than others is no reason to claim that he is being BASHED. jmoo
OJ Simpson,his daughter and his lawyers are frequently referred to in a very nagative manner by some here. Some have expressed pleasure at the death of J Cochran. Is that Bashing?
martin II

[socaldiva]

Mr Fred Goldman doe not have a weekly program on the LKL show.But he is a frequent guest on this show giving his views on the case, his efforts to extract money from Mr Simpson and recently talking about his efforts in the LBA 'IF I DID IT' book"

What is different is that since LBA stopped the planned auction of the book rights, he has not been seen on LKL.

Mr Goldman has made himself a public figure and therefore it is expected and acceptable that people comment on his actions on the GOLDMAN SUE thread. Because some posters views are different that others is no reason to claim that he is being BASHED. jmoo
martin II

YOU were the poster that claimed just a few posts back that he was on weekly. Fred seldom appears, so there is nothing noteworthy about him not being on recently. However, you seem to judge everything he does as something with a hidden/negative motive. I'd say that says more about you than it does about Fred Goldman.

No one claimed that differing views equals bashing. I consider what you post about the Goldmans bashing. "Fred hasn't been on LKL crying lately = BASHING imo

[socaldiva]

*snip*
Mr Goldman has made himself a public figure

Oh no he didn't! :no:

[martin II]

Martin,
I TOTALLY AGREE !!!
Here is a very interesting article about fred:
http://www.associatecontent.com/pop-print.shtml

jotun

jotun
For some reason i could not open this link,
MARTIN ii

[jotun]

jotun

Fred has not been on his regular weekly LKL show crying either. Maby he is afraid Larry will ask the magic question 'WHY THE CHANGE OF HEART ABOUT THE BOOK"?

MARTIN ii

Martin,
Remember???
Larry DID ask the magic guestion. Fred's stuttering and stammering were simply PRICELESS!!!

jotun

[socaldiva]

Martin,
Remember???
Larry DID ask the magic guestion. Fred's stuttering and stammering were simply PRICELESS!!!

jotun

LKL has a transcript of each show. Can you provide a date in which Fred Goldman was on "stuttering & stammering" relative to this "magic question"?

[martin II]

Sassy hi

Hopefully we may get a new poster or two soon.

martin II

[martin II]

I read the book contract deal and have a question: In the contract, it states that the contract is governed by the laws of the State of New York. Does anyone know exactly what that means?

weezer
what paragraph in the contract did you find this informaiton?

martin II

[fbgweezer]

so if the book contract was 'governed by the state of new york,' how come Mr. Goldman didnt file suit there? Would that not have been the state where the actionable cause took place?

[martin II]

Fred was not a part of the contract between HC and LBA.
I have not read that this contract was goverened by N.Y. law in the contract i saw.

where did you read this in the contract?
martin II

[martin II]

"It is doubted the California court or Sheriff’s office would have any jurisdiction with regard to matters filed in the State of Florida. Separately, Fred Goldman, father of Ron, vowed to continue his fight by petitioning the bankruptcy court to have the stay vacated."

[socaldiva]

"It is doubted the California court or Sheriff’s office would have any jurisdiction with regard to matters filed in the State of Florida. Separately, Fred Goldman, father of Ron, vowed to continue his fight by petitioning the bankruptcy court to have the stay vacated."


What are you quoting here? What/who is the source? :confused:

[PeterPaul]

OK, OJ was found not guilty in the criminal trial and I understand that doesn't mean the same as innocent and all, but I don't think that someone who is found not guilty in a criminal trial should be able to be sued in a civil trial.

Like lots of people I think he more than likely did the crime, but the fact is still that he was found not guilty and you can't go back and change that.

Plus, I don't see much wrong with writing a book. After all, so did everybody else and they included bloody pictures of Nicole and Ron in the books which I don't think is right.

[fbgweezer]

OK, OJ was found not guilty in the criminal trial and I understand that doesn't mean the same as innocent and all, but I don't think that someone who is found not guilty in a criminal trial should be able to be sued in a civil trial.

Like lots of people I think he more than likely did the crime, but the fact is still that he was found not guilty and you can't go back and change that.

Plus, I don't see much wrong with writing a book. After all, so did everybody else and they included bloody pictures of Nicole and Ron in the books which I don't think is right.

I believe the difference here is that although there was a criminal trial finding of not guilty, the majority of people understand that the verdict was not based on the facts, evidence and testimony.

You are right, lots of people made money writing about the crime and trials -- the objection to orenthal doing the same is repugnant to most simply because most believe he was proven to be the murderer.

If you believe that he should not have been held accountable by virtue of the civil trial, do you also believe that the findings of LE accountability via civil trials are also wrong?

[martin II]

OK, OJ was found not guilty in the criminal trial and I understand that doesn't mean the same as innocent and all, but I don't think that someone who is found not guilty in a criminal trial should be able to be sued in a civil trial.

Like lots of people I think he more than likely did the crime, but the fact is still that he was found not guilty and you can't go back and change that.

Plus, I don't see much wrong with writing a book. After all, so did everybody else and they included bloody pictures of Nicole and Ron in the books which I don't think is right.

PeterPaul

Welcome to the forum.

I have never agreed with a person found NOT GUILTY in criminal trial being tried again in a civil trial for money. It seems basicaly unfair but it is the law.

martin II

[PeterPaul]

I believe the difference here is that although there was a criminal trial finding of not guilty, the majority of people understand that the verdict was not based on the facts, evidence and testimony.

You are right, lots of people made money writing about the crime and trials -- the objection to orenthal doing the same is repugnant to most simply because most believe he was proven to be the murderer.

If you believe that he should not have been held accountable by virtue of the civil trial, do you also believe that the findings of LE accountability via civil trials are also wrong?

Well OK, I don't think anybody should have to go through a civil trial if they went through a criminal one and were found not guilty.

Plus, I think it's just as repugnant to write a book and include those bloody pictures because I think it's disrespectful to the families of the murdered.

[PeterPaul]

PeterPaul

Welcome to the forum.

I have never agreed with a person found NOT GUILTY in criminal trial being tried again in a civil trial for money. It seems basicaly unfair but it is the law.

martin II

Thanks for the welcome.

And I wonder why Fred Goldman is doing things this way now. I thought he said he didn't care about the money??? Don't get me wrong, I know OJ's a scam artist and I'm sure he's hiding money but I wouldn't want to pay 33 million if I was found criminally not guilty either.

[fbgweezer]

Well OK, I don't think anybody should have to go through a civil trial if they went through a criminal one and were found not guilty.

Plus, I think it's just as repugnant to write a book and include those bloody pictures because I think it's disrespectful to the families of the murdered.

Okay -- Then johnnie cochran and others would never have had a claim to fame. Works for me.

I think for the most part, when pictures are included in a book they are used to define/explain distances, posture, locale, etc., and not for gore impact. At least, that's the way I've always viewed them and I believe most folks who love true crime would probably say they feel the same way. Was it all the books you felt that way toward or just one/some in particular?

[PeterPaul]

Okay -- Then johnnie cochran and others would never have had a claim to fame. Works for me.

I think for the most part, when pictures are included in a book they are used to define/explain distances, posture, locale, etc., and not for gore impact. At least, that's the way I've always viewed them and I believe most folks who love true crime would probably say they feel the same way. Was it all the books you felt that way toward or just one/some in particular?

Not all. But, and I'm no professional so maybe I just am missing the reasoning behind it, but in Lange and Vannatter's book it showed a photo of Nicole's fist in demostration of a "death grip" that people apparently do with their hands while dying. Why was that necessary?

The one that bugged me the most though was Mark Fuhrman's because every other book had black and white pictures while his were full color. What could the reason for that be?

I understand your point, maybe I'm just being too sensitive on it but it's always bugged me (not just with this case). The Helter Skelter book with it's photos of Sharon Tate or the National Enquirer when they printed pictures of Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold lying on the floor after shooting themselves.

[martin II]

The issue on the books is that maby 50 people wrote books about the murders and oj. Everyone had a shot at having the inside info or a strong opinion on that happened on 6/12. Many made millions off of OJ SIMPSON and many media people had their careers launched to a level they would have never reached if not for the OJ story. ALL for profit and with not a ounce of concern that they were causing the famalies to relive this event yet again.
Oj writes a book and he is causing harm to the famalies simply because some
refuse to accept the verdict of a legal jury that found him not guilty.

Pleople cannot or should not, because of their beliefs try to prevent oj simpson from making a living.

As it stand now even Mr Goldman has no problem with the book oj wrote, as he is making evey effort to ensure that the rights to the book end up in his hands so he can sell it for MONEY.
MARTIN ii

[martin II]

Not all. But, and I'm no professional so maybe I just am missing the reasoning behind it, but in Lange and Vannatter's book it showed a photo of Nicole's fist in demostration of a "death grip" that people apparently do with their hands while dying. Why was that necessary?

The one that bugged me the most though was Mark Fuhrman's because every other book had black and white pictures while his were full color. What could the reason for that be?

I understand your point, maybe I'm just being too sensitive on it but it's always bugged me (not just with this case). The Helter Skelter book with it's photos of Sharon Tate or the National Enquirer when they printed pictures of Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold lying on the floor after shooting themselves.

Peter Paul
Did the prosecution show color pictures to the jury of nicole and ron at the Bundy murder scene.

martin II

[fbgweezer]

Not all. But, and I'm no professional so maybe I just am missing the reasoning behind it, but in Lange and Vannatter's book it showed a photo of Nicole's fist in demostration of a "death grip" that people apparently do with their hands while dying. Why was that necessary?

The one that bugged me the most though was Mark Fuhrman's because every other book had black and white pictures while his were full color. What could the reason for that be?

I understand your point, maybe I'm just being too sensitive on it but it's always bugged me (not just with this case). The Helter Skelter book with it's photos of Sharon Tate or the National Enquirer when they printed pictures of Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold lying on the floor after shooting themselves.

I totally agree that the pictures can be and or often times gruesome. I don't know about the 'death grip' photo except that each of us who debate/discuss the crime seem to have a little different slant on the evidence. I will look at the book this evening and see what the reference is to it in the book.

Although I have Fuhrman's book, I have to confess that I've never read it cover to cover. I have used it as a comparison to Toobin's, Rajala (sp) and Petrocelli's books and I don't know that I've ever looked at the pictures.

In this day and time, sensitive is good. We've unfortunately become very jaded when it comes to cruelty and death. IMO

[PeterPaul]

Peter Paul
Did the prosecution show color pictures to the jury of nicole and ron at the Bundy murder scene.

martin II

Yes they did.

[PeterPaul]

The issue on the books is that maby 50 people wrote books about the murders and oj. Everyone had a shot at having the inside info or a strong opinion on that happened on 6/12. Many made millions off of OJ SIMPSON and many media people had their careers launched to a level they would have never reached if not for the OJ story. ALL for profit and with not a ounce of concern that they were causing the famalies to relive this event yet again.
Oj writes a book and he is causing harm to the famalies simply because some
refuse to accept the verdict of a legal jury that found him not guilty.

Pleople cannot or should not, because of their beliefs try to prevent oj simpson from making a living.

As it stand now even Mr Goldman has no problem with the book oj wrote, as he is making evey effort to ensure that the rights to the book end up in his hands so he can sell it for MONEY.
MARTIN ii

I know, I just don't get Fred Goldman at this point. I thought I understood his motives but I guess not. It seems shady to me.

Let me ask you this, what do you think about Mark Fuhrman being convicted of perjury? Do you agree with the felony charge? Or maybe I should ask this on the other thread about him???

[fbgweezer]

I know, I just don't get Fred Goldman at this point. I thought I understood his motives but I guess not. It seems shady to me.

Let me ask you this, what do you think about Mark Fuhrman being convicted of perjury? Do you agree with the felony charge? Or maybe I should ask this on the other thread about him???

Why would you think shady? He has said that his purpose has been to keep orenthal from making money off of it. And I agree that for the murderer to write the story of how he did it while proclaiming his innocence and hiding behind the law in order not to pay his penalty, is wrong. I don't know of anyone who cares to read the book but I know of a lot of people who do not want orenthal to make money off of it.

Mark Fuhrman being convicted of perjury is -- to me -- about the same as the NGs feel about orenthal being found liable in the civil trial. The only difference is that Fuhrman paid his penalty. I think the actions of orenthal and Fuhrman since the trial says alot about the character of the man.

[martin II]

I know, I just don't get Fred Goldman at this point. I thought I understood his motives but I guess not. It seems shady to me.

Let me ask you this, what do you think about Mark Fuhrman being convicted of perjury? Do you agree with the felony charge? Or maybe I should ask this on the other thread about him???

PeterPaul

It is my opinion that Fred Goldman was looking at the money from the beginning but decided that public support would be more forth comming
if he used the moral issue and " I am not in this for the money angle" to secure public support. Which he got. He said he wanted a civil verdict against oj. Which he got. The only thing he has not received is the money.

He and his lawyers have been after the money from day one so much so that they have slammed the door on even the Browns sharing in the money he thought he would get from the auction. Going after the money as he has must have caused him to have some high legal bill by now.

I don't remember what happened to perjury charge. re: Furhman/felony.
martin II

[socaldiva]

*snip*
they have slammed the door on even the Browns sharing in the money he thought he would get from the auction.

"Slammed the door"?? It's not Fred Goldman's place to sue on behalf of the Browns.

[martin II]

M Furhman
Nolo Contende plea.

He commited perjury but was let off because they ruled his lie was a "SMALL" lie.There have been many times cops have lied on the stand and not prosecuted for it because most times they are testifying for the prosecution.

The prosecution could have gone after him but they decided to let him off.
He then took the 5th so as not to have to answer the question so he would not be on the record of being caught on the record.

I am not sure if his probation was supervised as required because he did move out of state.

What is notable is that this guy was proven to be a racist by his many comments to various people about minorities including women but has been embraced by the media and some of the public and made into a successful selling writer on various murder cases. You figure.

martin II

[martin II]

It is my understanding that M Furhman is a convicted FELON.

MARTIN ii

[fbgweezer]

Fuhrman's plea was to the use of the 'n' word and had absolutely nothing to do with the murder trial, planting of evidence or framing orenthal.

"Nolo contendere - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In criminal trials in some common law jurisdictions, a plea of "nolo contendere" means that the defendant neither admits nor disputes the charge, and is an alternative to pleading guilty or not guilty. This is also called a plea of no contest, stand mute, or, more informally, a "nolo" plea. "Nolo contendere" is Latin and literally means "I do not want to contend." While not technically a guilty plea, it is made as a part of plea bargains and has the same effect as a guilty plea.

Defendants do not always have the right to enter this plea, and different jurisdictions have restrictions on its use. In the United States, state law determines whether and under what circumstances a defendant may plead no contest.

[edit] Effect of a plea of nolo contendere
Defendants are still subject to all the penalties arising from that conviction (such as loss of a driver's license or the right to own a firearm), and if such defendants are later convicted of another offense, it can be considered as an aggravating factor.

A defendant will not, however, be made to allocute to the charges. Also, this plea (unlike a guilty plea) may not be used against them to establish negligence per se, malice, or even that they actually did the acts which resulted in the conviction, in later civil proceedings related to the same set of facts as the criminal prosecution."

[PeterPaul]

It is my understanding that M Furhman is a convicted FELON.

MARTIN ii

Yes, He has a felony conviction for perjury. Because of that he lost his right to vote, own a gun, and a bunch of other things.

What are your thoughts about that? I think that he was a real jerk for acting the way that he did and being so cocky all of the time and for treating people like he did.

I don't think he planted a glove but I think he lied about seeing certain things like blood in the Bronco.

[martin II]

"While not technically a guilty plea, it is made as a part of plea bargains and has the same effect as a guilty plea."

At any rate everyone that followed the trial knows all about his behavior
as far a blacks /women and mixed couples was concerned. What is surprising is how SOME women give him a pass knowing he was involved in MAW.

M Furhman is a felon. his plea has the same effect as a guilty plea.

Furhman is a first class racist AND jerk as you say. I kinda think he thought he was gods a gift to women kinda guy.


Furhman lost some things as a result of being a felon but not as much as he would have lost if he had been put in the slammer as you or i would have been if we had been cought in a lie as he was.

martin II

[Kayleighjo]

M Furhman
Nolo Contende plea.

He commited perjury but was let off because they ruled his lie was a "SMALL" lie.There have been many times cops have lied on the stand and not prosecuted for it because most times they are testifying for the prosecution.

The prosecution could have gone after him but they decided to let him off.
He then took the 5th so as not to have to answer the question so he would not be on the record of being caught on the record.

I am not sure if his probation was supervised as required because he did move out of state.

What is notable is that this guy was proven to be a racist by his many comments to various people about minorities including women but has been embraced by the media and some of the public and made into a successful selling writer on various murder cases. You figure.

martin II

Being a convicted felon is not being "let off". Are these your own personal words of wisdom or are you quoting someone here?

[Kayleighjo]

Okay -- Then johnnie cochran and others would never have had a claim to fame. Works for me.

I think for the most part, when pictures are included in a book they are used to define/explain distances, posture, locale, etc., and not for gore impact. At least, that's the way I've always viewed them and I believe most folks who love true crime would probably say they feel the same way. Was it all the books you felt that way toward or just one/some in particular?

I feel the same way as you do on this one.

It's not that I revel in the photos of a murder victim, but photographs help me understand more the nature of the crime, the way it took place, and serves as a reminder that it's avery solemn topic that should be taken seriously no matter what.

Unfortunately when the OJ verdict was read it seemed that the black communities shown on television felt they were watching him score a touchdown instead of remembering the fact that, regardless of the verdict, two people were dead and two children were left without a mother.

[martin II]

furhman

CIRCUMSTANCES IN AGGRAVATION [RULE OF COURT 421]

"The factors which appear to be circumstances in aggravation are:

Rule 421(a)(6): Defendant's perjury illegally interfered with the
judicial process.

Rule 421 (a)(11): Defendant took advantage of a position of trust. "

martin II

[fbgweezer]

The independent and LE investigations into Fuhrman's talk on the screenplay tape have been proven to be just that -- talk. There is and has never been any evidence that he did any of the things he talked about.

Fuhrman using the 'n' word ten years prior to orenthal's murderous rampage in no way compromised his position of trust. He continued to work in LE and there is evidence that he performed commendably in that position of trust.

Fuhrman using the 'n' word ten years prior to orenthal's murderous rampage in no way interfered with the judicial process of the criminal trial.

[fbgweezer]

I feel the same way as you do on this one.

It's not that I revel in the photos of a murder victim, but photographs help me understand more the nature of the crime, the way it took place, and serves as a reminder that it's avery solemn topic that should be taken seriously no matter what.

Unfortunately when the OJ verdict was read it seemed that the black communities shown on television felt they were watching him score a touchdown instead of remembering the fact that, regardless of the verdict, two people were dead and two children were left without a mother.

I looked at the books (at least the ones with crime scene photos) and for the most part, they are all the same with the exception that some show more detail. I'm not into gore and gruesome but I've found the photos to be helpful when discussing the size of the walkway, where the bodies where in proximity to each other and the walkway/footprints, which way the gate swung and to which side it opened, etc.

[socaldiva]

Furhman lost some things as a result of being a felon but not as much as he would have lost if he had been put in the slammer as you or i would have been if we had been cought in a lie as he was.


Orenthal lied MANY times during the course of the civil trial. Too bad they didn't toss him in the slammer. He wasn't even charged with perjury & his lies were all relative to the actual murders, not merely the use of one word.

[2L8 4A D8]

Orenthal lied MANY times during the course of the civil trial. Too bad they didn't toss him in the slammer. He wasn't even charged with perjury & his lies were all relative to the actual murders, not merely the use of one word.

:beer: :beer: :beer:

[sassylassy]

Thanks for the welcome.

And I wonder why Fred Goldman is doing things this way now. I thought he said he didn't care about the money??? Don't get me wrong, I know OJ's a scam artist and I'm sure he's hiding money but I wouldn't want to pay 33 million if I was found criminally not guilty either.

Hi PP :seeya:

welcome aboard...... I have the same questions & thoughts...:beer:

[sassylassy]

Not all. But, and I'm no professional so maybe I just am missing the reasoning behind it, but in Lange and Vannatter's book it showed a photo of Nicole's fist in demostration of a "death grip" that people apparently do with their hands while dying. Why was that necessary?

.


I agree the pictures in L&V book are gruesome, I noticed in one photo u can clearly see Nicoles neck wounds..very graphic!

But pictures can say so much more than words!

((imo))

[martin II]

The independent and LE investigations into Fuhrman's talk on the screenplay tape have been proven to be just that -- talk. There is and has never been any evidence that he did any of the things he talked about.

Fuhrman using the 'n' word ten years prior to orenthal's murderous rampage in no way compromised his position of trust. He continued to work in LE and there is evidence that he performed commendably in that position of trust.

Fuhrman using the 'n' word ten years prior to orenthal's murderous rampage in no way interfered with the judicial process of the criminal trial.

that may be because he would have never said those things to you and you would have never had to opportunity to observe him saying/doing it to a minority or mixed couple.

martin II

[martin II]

Why would you think shady? He has said that his purpose has been to keep orenthal from making money off of it. And I agree that for the murderer to write the story of how he did it while proclaiming his innocence and hiding behind the law in order not to pay his penalty, is wrong. I don't know of anyone who cares to read the book but I know of a lot of people who do not want orenthal to make money off of it.

Mark Fuhrman being convicted of perjury is -- to me -- about the same as the NGs feel about orenthal being found liable in the civil trial. The only difference is that Fuhrman paid his penalty. I think the actions of orenthal and Fuhrman since the trial says alot about the character of the man.

what is your opinion about furhmans activities in 'MEN AGAINST WOMEN' MAW
as a lapd cop?

martin II

[martin II]

I looked at the books (at least the ones with crime scene photos) and for the most part, they are all the same with the exception that some show more detail. I'm not into gore and gruesome but I've found the photos to be helpful when discussing the size of the walkway, where the bodies where in proximity to each other and the walkway/footprints, which way the gate swung and to which side it opened, etc.

a simple hand drawing would give the same info. or computer generated pictture or even black and white photo.

martin II

[martin II]

The independent and LE investigations into Fuhrman's talk on the screenplay tape have been proven to be just that -- talk. There is and has never been any evidence that he did any of the things he talked about.

Fuhrman using the 'n' word ten years prior to orenthal's murderous rampage in no way compromised his position of trust. He continued to work in LE and there is evidence that he performed commendably in that position of trust.

Fuhrman using the 'n' word ten years prior to orenthal's murderous rampage in no way interfered with the judicial process of the criminal trial.


your hero m furhman.

do you believe furhman was writing a screen play when he said his N and other words to K BELL? (burn all n******)

do you think he was writing a screen play when he was making all those visits(on duty and in uniform) to N Singer's apartment talking about n****** and mixed couples and calling her a b**** when she told him niot to bring his butt back into her house?

martinii

[2L8 4A D8]

The independent and LE investigations into Fuhrman's talk on the screenplay tape have been proven to be just that -- talk. There is and has never been any evidence that he did any of the things he talked about.

Fuhrman using the 'n' word ten years prior to orenthal's murderous rampage in no way compromised his position of trust. He continued to work in LE and there is evidence that he performed commendably in that position of trust.

Fuhrman using the 'n' word ten years prior to orenthal's murderous rampage in no way interfered with the judicial process of the criminal trial.

:beer: :beer: :beer:

[William Anthony]

Perhaps there may not have been a direct connection to the use of the N word by the MF, but there was strong circumstantial evidence of tampering/altering/fabrication/planting as it relates to the glove, through crime scene videos, the lack of blood leading to where the glove was found behing Kato's quarters, the blood leading from rockingham to the front entrance and the prevarications and motivations for the prevarications by the MF. Additionally, once the credibility of a witness has been called into question, the jury is free to ignore the rermainder of his testimony.

[martin II]

Perhaps there may not have been a direct connection to the use of the N word by the MF, but there was strong circumstantial evidence of tampering/altering/fabrication/planting as it relates to the glove, through crime scene videos, the lack of blood leading to where the glove was found behing Kato's quarters, the blood leading from rockingham to the front entrance and the prevarications and motivations for the prevarications by the MF. Additionally, once the credibility of a witness has been called into question, the jury is free to ignore the rermainder of his testimony.

william
i agree.
The judges instructions allows the jury to do exactly what you stated in you last sentance. Not only with furhman but also with Vanhatter, fung, Mazallou(sp) and the glove 'EXPERT'.
martin II

[William Anthony]

william
i agree.
The judges instructions allows the jury to do exactly what you stated in you last sentance. Not only with furhman but also with Vanhatter, fung, Mazallou(sp) and the glove 'EXPERT'.
martin II

Martin,

Thank you and I know that you have 20/20 unobstucted vision.

[bobaugust]

Perhaps there may not have been a direct connection to the use of the N word by the MF, but there was strong circumstantial evidence of tampering/altering/fabrication/planting as it relates to the glove, through crime scene videos, the lack of blood leading to where the glove was found behing Kato's quarters, the blood leading from rockingham to the front entrance and the prevarications and motivations for the prevarications by the MF. Additionally, once the credibility of a witness has been called into question, the jury is free to ignore the rermainder of his testimony.

There isn't one single shred of evidence that supports the claim that the glove found at Rockingham was planted. All the blood, fiber and hair evidence found on the Rockingham glove points only to Simpson and the two victims. Nobody else.

The lack of blood near the glove is not evidence of anything except that Simpson didn't drip blood there or if he did it was never seen. The fact that Kaelin heard someone behind his room and when he went to check out the noises he heard he was seen coming from around his house at the same exact time Simpson was first seen entering the house. That's additional evidence that Simpson was the person who made the noises behind Kaelin's room.

Simpson's blood drops outside and inside his Rockingham gate only tell us Simpson was outside and inside his gate when he dripped that blood. The placement of the blood drops are not consistent with Simpson dripping that blood by entering that gate.

Fuhrman's testimony regarding the physical evidence at Bundy is completely consistent with every other witness who testified to seeing the same evidence including witnesses who were at Bundy before Fuhrman ever arrived there.

bobaugust

[jotun]

Martin,
Remember???
Larry DID ask the magic guestion. Fred's stuttering and stammering were simply PRICELESS!!!

jotun

Martin.
That should read:
Fred's stuttering,stammering and especially his FACIAL EXPRESSION were PRICELESS!!!

Also to ? there are LK transcripts:
See smartfellows site March.
Lollie found & posted it.

jotun

[socaldiva]

Martin.
That should read:
Fred's stuttering,stammering and especially his FACIAL EXPRESSION were PRICELESS!!!

Also to ? there are LK transcripts:
See smartfellows site March.
Lollie found & posted it.

jotun

"See smartfellows site"? No, I think you should post a link here, since you are making the claim here.

[socaldiva]

Since I doubt a link will be offered, here is one to the LKL interview. I don't see any stuttering & flustered speech:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0703/14/lkl.01.html

KING: All right, what happened, Fred?

What changed?

F. GOLDMAN: Well, I think what changed is very simply the -- the fact that we know more about it now than we did then and we -- we believe that -- that there's perhaps good reason to see it back out in print. Everybody that's read it -- my attorneys specifically -- believe that it's tantamount to a confession.

KING: And so since it is believed to be a confession, you therefore want the public to read it, even though there's the horrible scene, one chapter, about the death of your son?

F. GOLDMAN: As we understand it, he does not go into specifics about the brutality of the murders. But in answer to your question, I guess that there is some good reason to, perhaps, let the public read the confession of a murderer.

K. GOLDMAN: I also think that the point that also needs to be made is that part of the reason that we were so upset the first time that this went down is because he profited from it. He purposefully and, you know, deceitfully, went behind our back, in cahoots with another organization, to evade the judgment.

[jotun]

before Fuhrman ever arrived there.

bobaugust
All--- Utter NONSENSE...The usual lame excuses word for word.That belong on the Corrupt-Fuhrman thread.
Please take it there.
This is GOLDMAN'S SUE thread!!!

jotun

[martin II]

Martin.
That should read:
Fred's stuttering,stammering and especially his FACIAL EXPRESSION were PRICELESS!!!

Also to ? there are LK transcripts:
See smartfellows site March.
Lollie found & posted it.

jotun

jotun
fred always stutters and stammers when asked why he changed his mind about the book that he is now trying to get his hands on to sell. The book he wants to sell about the murder of his son.

martin II

[socaldiva]

jotun
fred always stutters and stammers when asked why he changed his mind about the book that he is now trying to get his hands on to sell. The book he wants to sell about the murder of his son.

martin II

Then you shouldn't have any problem coming up with a link to support these claims. I've already provided one & which no stammering or stuttering was indicated.

[jotun]

here is one to the LKL interview. I don't see any stuttering & flustered speech:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0703/14/lkl.01.html

KING: All right, what happened, Fred?

What changed?

F. GOLDMAN: Well, I think what changed is very simply the -- the fact that we know more about it now than we did then and we -- we believe that -- that there's perhaps good reason to see it back out in print. Everybody that's read it -- my attorneys specifically -- believe that it's tantamount to a confession.


All:

STUTTERING -- PROVEN!!!

the--the
we--we
that--that
it--my
specifically--believe

Amazing.
Even comes across in print.

Wish you ALL could see the tape.

Caught in a LIE.
Fred's PANICED FACIAL EXPRESSION. PRICELESS!!!

jotun

[socaldiva]

All:

STUTTERING -- PROVEN!!!

the--the
we--we
that--that
it--my
specifically--believe

Amazing.
Even comes across in print.

Wish you ALL could see the tape.

Caught in a LIE.
Fred's PANICED FACIAL EXPRESSION. PRICELESS!!!

jotun

No, that doesn't equate to stuttering. I saw the tape. There was NO STUTTERING, nor was there a 'PANICED FACIAL EXPRESSION'.

[martin II]

All:

STUTTERING -- PROVEN!!!

the--the
we--we
that--that
it--my
specifically--believe

Amazing.
Even comes across in print.

Wish you ALL could see the tape.

Caught in a LIE.
Fred's PANICED FACIAL EXPRESSION. PRICELESS!!!

jotun

Jotun

I think Mr Fred Goldman was on a positive high arter he received the questionable decision by judge Goldberg directing that the rights to be book be aucitoned and the money given to Him.

I think this quickly turned to utter dissapointment on his part when LBA attorney filed for Bankruptcy in Florida which stopped the auction and the expected free money to Mr Fred Goldman and his lawyers.

I think that Mr Fred Goldmans lawyers should have known that LBA had the option of Bankruptcy when they asked for and received this decision from Judge Goldberg so it should not have been such a surprise.

Mr Fred Goldmans lawyer has said that he will ask the Florida bankruptcy judge to sell Mr Fred Goldman the rights so he can sell the book. I am wondering if Mr Fred Goldman has standing in a Bankruptcy action by LBA in Florida.jmoo
martin II

[Kate Sachel]

Jotun

I think Mr Fred Goldman was on a positive high arter he received the questionable decision by judge Goldberg directing that the rights to be book be aucitoned and the money given to Him.

I think this quickly turned to utter dissapointment on his part when LBA attorney filed for Bankruptcy in Florida which stopped the auction and the expected free money to Mr Fred Goldman and his lawyers.

I think that Mr Fred Goldmans lawyers should have known that LBA had the option of Bankruptcy when they asked for and received this decision from Judge Goldberg so it should not have been such a surprise.

Mr Fred Goldmans lawyer has said that he will ask the Florida bankruptcy judge to sell Mr Fred Goldman the rights so he can sell the book. I am wondering if Mr Fred Goldman has standing in a Bankruptcy action by LBA in Florida.jmoo
martin II

When an individual files a bankruptcy action, all creditors have a right to file a claim for monies owed to them regardless of the state that they reside in versus the state in which the bankruptcy action was filed.

Kate

[Kate Sachel]

Perhaps there may not have been a direct connection to the use of the N word by the MF, but there was strong circumstantial evidence of tampering/altering/fabrication/planting as it relates to the glove, through crime scene videos, the lack of blood leading to where the glove was found behing Kato's quarters, the blood leading from rockingham to the front entrance and the prevarications and motivations for the prevarications by the MF. Additionally, once the credibility of a witness has been called into question, the jury is free to ignore the rermainder of his testimony.

Though you are busy, I am looking forward to the day in which you have time to review OJ Simpson's depositions and testimony in the civil trial.

I think you will find that no one prevaricated more than Mr. Simpson.

Kate

[bobaugust]

All--- Utter NONSENSE...The usual lame excuses word for word.That belong on the Corrupt-Fuhrman thread.
Please take it there.
This is GOLDMAN'S SUE thread!!!

jotun

Jotun, since you feel you had to make a comment regarding my response to William's original posting on this thread then I will respond to you here.

No, it's not nonsense, it's a fact. There were 15 other police personnel at Bundy during the two hours before Phillips and Fuhrman arrived there. None of them ever saw a second a glove there including Terrazas and Riske the two patrol officers who were the first to see the evidence.

bobaugust

[martin II]

LBA filed bankruptcy as a Florida corporation. LBA creditors will have standing
in this bankruptcy court disposition.I am trying to understand if Mr. Goldman
has standing as a creditor of LBA to participate in any way.
martin II

[jotun]

LBA filed bankruptcy as a Florida corporation. LBA creditors will have standing
in this bankruptcy court disposition.I am trying to understand if Mr. Goldman
has standing as a creditor of LBA to participate in any way.
martin II

Martin,
Don't understand how Arnelle,Jason, Sydney,& Justin could owe fred money.
How could he be a legit creditor???
He thru LBA into bankruptcy.
Otherwise they would have the book profits now.
Hope the kids SUE fred for those profits.

Breaking News
http://www.miamiherald.com/1416/v-print/story/99146.html

jotun

[socaldiva]

*snip*
Hope the kids SUE fred for those profits.


If the kids should sue anyone, it should be Orenthal.imo. IIRC, He is the one that claimed the money was for them & then spent it.

[2L8 4A D8]

If the kids should sue anyone, it should be Orenthal.imo. IIRC, He is the one that claimed the money was for them & then spent it.

B * I * N * G * O :beer: :beer: :beer:

[martin II]

Martin,
Don't understand how Arnelle,Jason, Sydney,& Justin could owe fred money.
How could he be a legit creditor???
He thru LBA into bankruptcy.
Otherwise they would have the book profits now.
Hope the kids SUE fred for those profits.

Breaking News
http://www.miamiherald.com/1416/v-print/story/99146.html

jotun

jotun

Thanks for your response. LBA did not owe Mr Fred Goldman anything.The ruling Judge Goldberg gave Mr Fred Godman in private means nothing now as LBA'S lawyer has earned his pay so far.
martin II
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Martin,
Don't understand how Arnelle,Jason, Sydney,& Justin could owe fred money.
How could he be a legit creditor???
He thru LBA into bankruptcy.
Otherwise they would have the book profits now.
Hope the kids SUE fred for those profits.

Breaking News
http://www.miamiherald.com/1416/v-print/story/99146.html

jotun

orenthal continues to show himself for the coward and bully he is -- took the money on the pretense of providing for his children and then spent it on himself.

It is my undertanding that LBA had had no activity except for the book deal so I'm not sure how Mr. Goldman 'thru' them into bankruptcy. It's more like orenthal got greedy and risked his children's future (again).

I'm still wondering how he managed to get his hands on the money if it in fact did belong to the children.

[martin II]

The details of how and why OJ was paid have been explained here many times. His payment was seperate from that that belonged to LBA.

martin II

[martin II]

The contract between HC and LBA specified that Oj Simpson was to receive a specified amount of money in advance and the rights to the book was to go to the children. The copyrite for the title was made in the name of LBA by H.C.
So any money paid to OJ Simpson was due to him for signing his name to the project and was not earmarked for LBA.

So Oj Simpson did not take any money from his children.
martin II

[Kate Sachel]

My questions regarding Fred Goldman have been laid to rest.

It has been announced that Fred Goldman is working to obtain the rights to OJ Simpson's book to publish an alternate version of it. The title that is currently in the works is "Confessions of a Double Murderer".

I applaud that, I really do.

Kate

[Kate Sachel]

LBA filed bankruptcy as a Florida corporation. LBA creditors will have standing
in this bankruptcy court disposition.I am trying to understand if Mr. Goldman
has standing as a creditor of LBA to participate in any way.
martin II

If a United States bankruptcy judge rules that LBA was a surrogate for OJ Simpson, then Fred Goldman would have rights as a creditor.

Arnelle Simpson will be required to give a deposition, and turn over detailed financial documents.

It's going to get interesting, I believe.

Kate

[martin II]

Fred Goldmans lawyer said this two weeks ago. LBA has the copyright on the title 'IF I DID IT' wonder how that can be changed by Fred Goldman.
martin II

[fbgweezer]

My questions regarding Fred Goldman have been laid to rest.

It has been announced that Fred Goldman is working to obtain the rights to OJ Simpson's book to publish an alternate version of it. The title that is currently in the works is "Confessions of a Double Murderer".

I applaud that, I really do.

Kate

Love it !!!!!!!!!!

[fbgweezer]

If a United States bankruptcy judge rules that LBA was a surrogate for OJ Simpson, then Fred Goldman would have rights as a creditor.

Arnelle Simpson will be required to give a deposition, and turn over detailed financial documents.

It's going to get interesting, I believe.

Kate

IIRC, galanter was on television talking about LBA being set up to represent orenthal. I think the financial details would be very interesting.

[martin II]

IF

martinII

[martin II]

IIRC, galanter was on television talking about LBA being set up to represent orenthal. I think the financial details would be very interesting.

weezer
did you ever find the contract(HC/LBA) paragraph that said it was goverened by the laws of N.Y. as you posted??

MARTIN ii

[socaldiva]

weezer
did you ever find the contract(HC/LBA) paragraph that said it was goverened by the laws of N.Y. as you posted??

MARTIN ii

Speaking of links, did you happen to find the link to support your post of what Ito said about playing fast & loose? IIRC FBG provided a link to the contract, she is not obligated to fetch the precise paragraph for you. imo

[2L8 4A D8]

Speaking of links, did you happen to find the link to support your post of what Ito said about playing fast & loose? IIRC FBG provided a link to the contract, she is not obligated to fetch the precise paragraph for you. imo

:beer: :beer: :beer: Again Diva, excellente!!!!

[jotun]

IIRC, galanter was on television talking about LBA being set up to represent orenthal. I think the financial details would be very interesting.

Yale said Arnelle,Jason,Sydney,& Justin's company LBA was totally LEGAL.

jotun

[socaldiva]

Yale said Arnelle,Jason,Sydney,& Justin's company LBA was totally LEGAL.

jotun

Would you expect him to say otherwise?

[jotun]

Fred Goldmans lawyer said this two weeks ago. LBA has the copyright on the title 'IF I DID IT' wonder how that can be changed by Fred Goldman.
martin II

Martin
With another judge on his side against Nicole's kids & step-kids.
Hope this judge follows the Florida law otherwise will be back to fred's usual money-grubbing.
Imagine trying to sell a book of only a few pages."Confessions"?????
It's time to put and end to this story.
It's never ending.
Will be 13 years June 12.

jotun

[sassylassy]

orenthal continues to show himself for the coward and bully he is -- took the money on the pretense of providing for his children and then spent it on himself.

It is my undertanding that LBA had had no activity except for the book deal so I'm not sure how Mr. Goldman 'thru' them into bankruptcy. It's more like orenthal got greedy and risked his children's future (again).

I'm still wondering how he managed to get his hands on the money if it in fact did belong to the children.

I have yet to see a break down of what OJ spent the money on :shrug:
(dollar for dollar) how do you know he spent it on himself ?:read:

[sassylassy]

>>>>snip<<<<
It's never ending.
Will be 13 years June 12.

jotun

so very true jotun!

((wow 13 yrs :eek: ))

[sassylassy]

IF

martinII


key word!

imo :)

[sassylassy]

Martin,
Don't understand how Arnelle,Jason, Sydney,& Justin could owe fred money.
How could he be a legit creditor???
He thru LBA into bankruptcy.
Otherwise they would have the book profits now.
Hope the kids SUE fred for those profits.

Breaking News
http://www.miamiherald.com/1416/v-print/story/99146.html

jotun

Hey Jotun :seeya:

I couldnt locate the story from your link?

Thanks!

[socaldiva]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070509/ap_en_ce/people_simpson

LOVE IT! :beer:

[martin II]

Martin
With another judge on his side against Nicole's kids & step-kids.
Hope this judge follows the Florida law otherwise will be back to fred's usual money-grubbing.
Imagine trying to sell a book of only a few pages."Confessions"?????
It's time to put and end to this story.
It's never ending.
Will be 13 years June 12.

jotun

jotun

If Mr Goldman writes this 'CONFESSION' book and Oj comes out and says he did not write it, who will buy it? how can Mr Goldman write a book and use Oj Simpsona name in it without his approval. this makes no sense.jmoo

martin II

[martin II]

I have yet to see a break down of what OJ spent the money on :shrug:
(dollar for dollar) how do you know he spent it on himself ?:read:

sassy

No one knows and no one will ever know. HC said what all money they paid oj was earmarked for oj NOT LBA. LBA was to get money from the sale of the book until Mr Goldman tried to grab that.jmoo
martin II

[socaldiva]

jotun

If Mr Goldman writes this 'CONFESSION' book and Oj comes out and says he did not write it, who will buy it? how can Mr Goldman write a book and use Oj Simpsona name in it without his approval. this makes no sense.jmoo

martin II

Who said Fred was going to write the book? It's already been written. IIRC, all Fred suggested was a change in the title from "If I Did It" to "Confessions of a Murderer" or something along those lines.

[sassylassy]

sassy

No one knows and no one will ever know. HC said what all money they paid oj was earmarked for oj NOT LBA. LBA was to get money from the sale of the book until Mr Goldman tried to grab that.jmoo
martin II

Yes I assumed that much. Just because OJ said he spent the money certainly doesnt prove the money was spent....just more OJ says :tongue:

I am sure its all sitting in a bank somewhere....but thats just MOO!!!:read:

[Suzee10]

Yes I assumed that much. Just because OJ said he spent the money certainly doesnt prove the money was spent....just more OJ says :tongue:

I am sure its all sitting in a bank somewhere....but thats just MOO!!!:read:



Of course it doesn't mean it is spent. It will not be the first time simpson has told a LIE!

[sassylassy]

Of course it doesn't mean it is spent. It will not be the first time simpson has told a LIE!

ha ha Thank you thats exactly my point!

so on that note we all have no idea where the money is ....:read:

[martin II]

ha ha Thank you thats exactly my point!

so on that note we all have no idea where the money is ....:read:

sassy hi
one thing is for sure OJ KNOWS MONEY.
martin II

[socaldiva]

sassy hi
one thing is for sure OJ KNOWS MONEY.
martin II

I don't think so. All it means is that he still has enough money to hire someone to try & hide his earnings prior to him making any deals with anyone. OJ doesn't have the mental ability to do this himself. imo

[sassylassy]

sassy hi
one thing is for sure OJ KNOWS MONEY.
martin II

Well he certainly knows where the money is...thats 4 sure!:read:

as always MOO :)

[Suzee10]

Well he certainly knows where the money is...thats 4 sure!:read:

as always MOO :)


Tha means he is still a liar.

[martin II]

Tha means he is still a liar.



OJ Simpson has absolutely no responsibility to tell anyone any details of his finances or what he does with his money so i think it is foolish for anyone to expect him to do so.jmoo
martin II

[Kate Sachel]

OJ Simpson has absolutely no responsibility to tell anyone any details of his finances or what he does with his money so i think it is foolish for anyone to expect him to do so.jmoo
martin II

He does have that responsibility. :read:

Kate

[tazzybaby]

Yale said Arnelle,Jason,Sydney,& Justin's company LBA was totally LEGAL.

jotun


The first two words in this post is the problem. We can't believe anything that Yale says. He isn't always informed. We can't trust what he says.

[martin II]

Well he certainly knows where the money is...thats 4 sure!:read:

as always MOO :)


It does seem that Oj always seem to know how to make good money. I think HC also knew how to do business by paying oj well before they announced the book deal. This allowed him to get his cash and do what he wanted to do with it. Maby pay some bills and put the remainder away for a rainy day.

So what happened to his money is no ones business regardless of what some think. One should never count another persons money.

martin II

[tazzybaby]

My questions regarding Fred Goldman have been laid to rest.

It has been announced that Fred Goldman is working to obtain the rights to OJ Simpson's book to publish an alternate version of it. The title that is currently in the works is "Confessions of a Double Murderer".

I applaud that, I really do.

Kate

Hi Kate,

I completely agree!

:beer:

[fbgweezer]

thanks Tazzy for the link to the suit article -- loved this part:

"At a hearing Monday, Cristol did rule that Simpson's oldest daughter, Arnelle Simpson, must give a deposition in the case and that LBA must turn over detailed financial documents to a court-appointed trustee and Goldman's lawyers."

Guess someone has the right to know how the money was spent. . . .

[martin II]

The first two words in this post is the problem. We can't believe anything that Yale says. He isn't always informed. We can't trust what he says.

tazzy hi

remember Yale did not set up LBA. their lawyer did.

martin II

[martin II]

thanks Tazzy for the link to the suit article -- loved this part:

"At a hearing Monday, Cristol did rule that Simpson's oldest daughter, Arnelle Simpson, must give a deposition in the case and that LBA must turn over detailed financial documents to a court-appointed trustee and Goldman's lawyers."

Guess someone has the right to know how the money was spent. . . .

TAZZY HI

I agree that yale sometines comments about issue that he is not involved directly in such as LBA. but he does have some knowledge about it.

the bankruptcy court can ask for and get what they want if they have made a request.I am not sure the banruptcy court has even considered the filing as yet. do you? This banruptcy involves LBA not Oj simpson. OJ simpson was not a principal of LBA. LBA's lawyer was the vp operating officer and HC paid oj according to the HC/LBAcontract .

I have no idea who christal is.IS HE THE BANKRUPTCY JUDGE?

martin II

[tazzybaby]

tazzy hi

remember Yale did not set up LBA. their lawyer did.

martin II

Hi Martin,

Exactly!! Yale should keep his mouth shut about all of this.

:rolleyes:

[tazzybaby]

TAZZY HI

I agree that yale sometines comments about issue that he is not involved directly in such as LBA. but he does have some knowledge about it.

the bankruptcy court can ask for and get what they want if they have made a request.I am not sure the banruptcy court has even considered the filing as yet. do you? This banruptcy involves LBA not Oj simpson. OJ simpson was not a principal of LBA. LBA's lawyer was the vp operating officer and HC paid oj according to the HC/LBAcontract .

I have no idea who christal is.IS HE THE BANKRUPTCY JUDGE?

martin II

Hi Martin,

I'm glad that you see that sometimes Yale should not comment. He only has knowledge second hand. And, as we already know......that means he doesn't really know. He seems to just yell to the top of the roof tops but not really know what he's talking about. That drives me crazy. He has lost any respect I had for him IMO.

You keep talking about OJ Simpson not being part of LBA but what you need to realize is that the first court has said that it was indeed a "shell" company. We're just waiting for the next court to do the same. Obviously it's pretty obvious because the court didn't throw it out. As a matter of fact, they ruled that Arnelle has to be deposed.

This whole thing is nothing but a big front to try and keep the Goldman's/Brown's from collecting any of the money. OJ should have put the money that he received directly into the "kids" account. However, he made sure he got paid first. Low life.

[martin II]

Hi Martin,

I'm glad that you see that sometimes Yale should not comment. He only has knowledge second hand. And, as we already know......that means he doesn't really know. He seems to just yell to the top of the roof tops but not really know what he's talking about. That drives me crazy. He has lost any respect I had for him IMO.

You keep talking about OJ Simpson not being part of LBA but what you need to realize is that the first court has said that it was indeed a "shell" company. We're just waiting for the next court to do the same. Obviously it's pretty obvious because the court didn't throw it out. As a matter of fact, they ruled that Arnelle has to be deposed.

This whole thing is nothing but a big front to try and keep the Goldman's/Brown's from collecting any of the money. OJ should have put the money that he received directly into the "kids" account. However, he made sure he got paid first. Low life.

tazzy hi
we will see if Fred can bulldozer this banrruptcy judge as he did the CA judge.


martin II

[martin II]

tazzy hi

MBA had never been in the book business before. The HC contract required that a company be set up to do this deal. LBA was that company. What do you see illegal about that. New companies are set up to do new business everyday in this country. LBA was set up for oj's children not him.

martin II

[tazzybaby]

tazzy hi

LBA was set up for oj's children not him.

martin II

This is not true. That's what the problem is. He owes money. He can't put money where he wants to without paying his bills first. He's trying to legally cheat. That makes me sick.

That's why I am so glad that the Goldman's aren't giving up. Hopefully, they never will.

[tazzybaby]

tazzy hi
we will see if Fred can bulldozer this banrruptcy judge as he did the CA judge.


martin II

You need to add an IMO.

Because I believe that the new judge in Florida will be just as intelligent as the Judge in CA and see right through OJ's shenanigans. IMO

:beer:

[martin II]

Hi Martin,

I'm glad that you see that sometimes Yale should not comment. He only has knowledge second hand. And, as we already know......that means he doesn't really know. He seems to just yell to the top of the roof tops but not really know what he's talking about. That drives me crazy. He has lost any respect I had for him IMO.

You keep talking about OJ Simpson not being part of LBA but what you need to realize is that the first court has said that it was indeed a "shell" company. We're just waiting for the next court to do the same. Obviously it's pretty obvious because the court didn't throw it out. As a matter of fact, they ruled that Arnelle has to be deposed.

This whole thing is nothing but a big front to try and keep the Goldman's/Brown's from collecting any of the money. OJ should have put the money that he received directly into the "kids" account. However, he made sure he got paid first. Low life.

tazzy hi

You may not agree but Oj Simpson is entitled to make money for OJ in addition to setting his children up to make money in this LBA business also. I don't know where you get the idea from that Oj is not allowed to work and make money and that you can determine what he should do with HIS money.jmoo
martin II

[fbgweezer]

This is not true. That's what the problem is. He owes money. He can't put money where he wants to without paying his bills first. He's trying to legally cheat. That makes me sick.

That's why I am so glad that the Goldman's aren't giving up. Hopefully, they never will.

orenthal and his apologists believe that since HE says he didn't do it, then he doesn't owe the money. You are right, he is a low life.

[martin II]

You need to add an IMO.

Because I believe that the new judge in Florida will be just as intelligent as the Judge in CA and see right through OJ's shenanigans. IMO

:beer:

tazzy hi
Maby it would be best if the american public can see Mr Goldman hawking this book on LKL about the death of his son so they can determine if it still is blood money or if the book is garbage as Fred has stated.
martin II

[martin II]

tazzy hi

you seem to know a lot about this case. I am trying to understand how Fred can get to be a CREDITOR LBA that would allow him to participate.

martin II

[martin II]

This is not true. That's what the problem is. He owes money. He can't put money where he wants to without paying his bills first. He's trying to legally cheat. That makes me sick.

That's why I am so glad that the Goldman's aren't giving up. Hopefully, they never will.

tazzy hi
then because you believe oj killed ron that he should not be allowed to use the u.s. and state laws that everone else uses to protect himself. The laws are good for everyone to use BUT oj .

martin II

[martin II]

This is not true. That's what the problem is. He owes money. He can't put money where he wants to without paying his bills first. He's trying to legally cheat. That makes me sick.

That's why I am so glad that the Goldman's aren't giving up. Hopefully, they never will.

tazzy hi

oj like anyone else can decide which creditors or judgement he wants to pay.
or not pay. THE ONLY THING fRED can do is what he has been doing for the last 12 years.jmoo

[socaldiva]

*snip*
Maby it would be best if the american public can see Mr Goldman hawking this book on LKL about the death of his son

Why is it that when OJ was set to sell the book, you didn't refer to it as "hawking"? Fred is far too dignified to "hawk" anything. :no:

[Suzee10]

OJ Simpson has absolutely no responsibility to tell anyone any details of his finances or what he does with his money so i think it is foolish for anyone to expect him to do so.jmoo
martin II


Oh yes he does have responsibility to detail his finances, he owes money from a civil trial.

[socaldiva]

Oh yes he does have responsibility to detail his finances, he owes money from a civil trial.


I agree & you don't get to "decide whether or not you will pay". If you don't pay, you are breaking the law. imo.

[Suzee10]

I agree & you don't get to "decide whether or not you will pay". If you don't pay, you are breaking the law. imo.

That is absolutly right but simpson does not always obey the law. Let's see, murder, drugs, theft (stealing Direct Tv).

[martin II]

Oh yes he does have responsibility to detail his finances, he owes money from a civil trial.

That shows how much you know.

martin II

[tazzybaby]

Martin,

If OJ had the right to make money and not pay the Goldman's or the Judgement then he'd be doing it. He has to hide the money he makes and he has to spend it right away. So, he DOES have to disclose what he makes and his finances when asked to do so. Otherwise the Goldman's will get what is rightfully theirs.

I think it's you that doesn't know.

:rolleyes:

[Suzee10]

That shows how much you know.

martin II

That is exactly what I know.

[martin II]

Martin,

If OJ had the right to make money and not pay the Goldman's or the Judgement then he'd be doing it. He has to hide the money he makes and he has to spend it right away. So, he DOES have to disclose what he makes and his finances when asked to do so. Otherwise the Goldman's will get what is rightfully theirs.

I think it's you that doesn't know.

:rolleyes:

tazzy hi

so far no judge has asked or demanded that oj give a detail account of any of his earnings. That should tell you something.
Maby you need to understand the limits of one having a judgement. So far Fred has beenm able to collect $26.00 from that 12 year old judgement.
If fred cannot find the money he is out of luck.
martin II

[martin II]

Martin,

If OJ had the right to make money and not pay the Goldman's or the Judgement then he'd be doing it. He has to hide the money he makes and he has to spend it right away. So, he DOES have to disclose what he makes and his finances when asked to do so. Otherwise the Goldman's will get what is rightfully theirs.

I think it's you that doesn't know.

:rolleyes:

tazzy hi'
Freds judgement cannot be enforced any more than a judgement against somneone by a credit card company.
martin II

[martin II]

Oh yes he does have responsibility to detail his finances, he owes money from a civil trial.

says who?

martin II

[martin II]

Martin,

If OJ had the right to make money and not pay the Goldman's or the Judgement then he'd be doing it. He has to hide the money he makes and he has to spend it right away. So, he DOES have to disclose what he makes and his finances when asked to do so. Otherwise the Goldman's will get what is rightfully theirs.

I think it's you that doesn't know.

:rolleyes:

tazzy hi
The judge that ruled(WRONGLY) in freds favor in CA. told fred that he was not concerned about any money HC paid oj simpson.
martin II

[sassylassy]

thanks Tazzy for the link to the suit article -- loved this part:

"At a hearing Monday, Cristol did rule that Simpson's oldest daughter, Arnelle Simpson, must give a deposition in the case and that LBA must turn over detailed financial documents to a court-appointed trustee and Goldman's lawyers."

Guess someone has the right to know how the money was spent. . . .

Thanks for the link. so what does this mean? Arnelle turns over her records & they see how much money she has or doesnt have ?

then what....they cant take the money (if there is any) from her
or can they? .....thats my question!

[fbgweezer]

I guess this is the tale of the tape: either the company was legit or not.

[martin II]

Thanks for the link. so what does this mean? Arnelle turns over her records & they see how much money she has or doesnt have ?

then what....they cant take the money (if there is any) from her
or can they? .....thats my question!

Arnelle's personal money is not a issue.imo. LBA's assets is the issue for the trustee. CREDITORS can receive money if there is a sale. My question is,
when and how did fred do anything for LBA to become a creditor.Did he invest in LBA. Remember HC registered the copyright for the book in the name of LBA. So will fred be able to void this u.s. registered copyright belonging to LBA. If so under what law.

martin II

[martin II]

I guess this is the tale of the tape: either the company was legit or not.


LBA was incorporated In the state of Florida by a lawyer. The state issued incorporaiton papers which were used to open a bank account, imo and these incorporation papers were presented to HC who made a legal contract with LBA that was obviously registered in court in the state of HC corporate headquarters imo

what is not legal about that. It happens every day.

martin II

[jotun]

jotun

If Mr Goldman writes this 'CONFESSION' book and Oj comes out and says he did not write it, who will buy it? how can Mr Goldman write a book and use Oj Simpsona name in it without his approval. this makes no sense.jmoo

martin II

Martin:
I agree.Makes no sense.
Have no idea who will buy a O.J.book from fred.
Certainly not me.
Possibly all the guilties who condemed it.
O.J.kept his right to the O.J.NAME & IMAGE that fred so desperately tried to take.fred's judge ruled that he can't have any future O.J.
earnings either.So would think Yale would file some legal papers to stop the book on those grounds.

jotun

[martin II]

Martin:
I agree.Makes no sense.
Have no idea who will buy a O.J.book from fred.
Certainly not me.
Possibly all the guilties who condemed it.
O.J.kept his right to the O.J.NAME & IMAGE that fred so desperately tried to take.fred's judge ruled that he can't have any future O.J.
earnings either.So would think Yale would file some legal papers to stop the book on those grounds.

jotun

jotun

Good point.

No book can be sold with oj's name in it unless oj agrees to his O.J. NAME & image being used as Oj has the trademark registered for his name and no one can have that.

I wonder if Freds lawyer has thought that far in advance.

So maby Fred will write a book about the murders without oj being mentioned .

Another idea would be for all the people that back fred can just decide to send him $2.00 ea. I am sure he will accept it. Then he can go home.

This story will never end.
martin II

[martin II]

jotun

ps

If fred gets the book title, how will he be able to sell it to a publisher when it is general knowledge that OJ Simpson ownes the rights to his name and image
and without that name and image there is no book.

How will that work?
martin II

[jotun]

Hi Martin,

Exactly!! Yale should keep his mouth shut about all of this.

:rolleyes:

All---IF Yale HAD kept his mouth shut we wouldn't have had ANY of this.

First was 'I didn't know'...
NO WONDER!!!

Soon as book was cancelled Yale said all the media that had condemed the book and interview were NOW asking him for an O.J.interview.

Then it was how the publishers wanted to publish 'IF I DID IT' but with the new book deal he Yale would be in CHARGE.

Think Yale is padding his part. Keeps O.J. needing him. He causes these money-grubbing suits[ 8 months] by BAITING old fred with the promise of a O.J. Lotto.He then goes to court and usually wins.Except this time it blew up and LBA had to file bankruptcy to save their book.Yale then crowed that fred wouldn't get anything.

But fred's still after the money and rights to the book to publish himself.

jotun

[socaldiva]

*snip*
O.J.kept his right to the O.J.NAME & IMAGE that fred so desperately tried to take.fred's judge ruled that he can't have any future O.J.
earnings either.

I don't think Fred is "desperate" on any level. As for your statement about a judge ruling that Fred "can't have any future OJ earnings either", that's absurd. The civil award still stands. I don't know where you get your information, but it's wrong. imo

[socaldiva]

*snip*
Then it was how the publishers wanted to publish 'IF I DID IT' but with the new book deal he Yale would be in CHARGE.


Do you have a link to support what you've posted here? I think you are speculating & I think you are wrong.

[socaldiva]

*snip*
If fred gets the book title, how will he be able to sell it to a publisher when it is general knowledge that OJ Simpson ownes the rights to his name and image
and without that name and image there is no book.

How will that work?
martin II

IIRC the Heisman trophy had Simpson's name on it & Fred got a hold of that, didn't he? :lol:

[2L8 4A D8]

Do you have a link to support what you've posted here? I think you are speculating & I think you are wrong.

:beer: :beer: :beer: Yes, IMO, she is definitely wrong, as usual!

[socaldiva]

:beer: :beer: Yes, IMO, she is definitely wrong, as usual!

Well, no link yet. Maybe later ;)

[Suzee10]

IIRC the Heisman trophy had Simpson's name on it & Fred got a hold of that, didn't he? :lol:


Yes he did!!!! Meltdown.

[socaldiva]

Yes he did!!!! Meltdown.

I'm sure Fred took great pleasure in that, being that it was OJ's most prized possession. Sweet. :D

[Suzee10]

I'm sure Fred took great pleasure in that, being that it was OJ's most prized possession. Sweet. :D


I am sure he did, and Jason beat his old statue to a pulp with a baseball bat. Seems there are a lot of people would either like to melt him down or just to beat his brains out.:D

[socaldiva]

I am sure he did, and Jason beat his old statue to a pulp with a baseball bat. Seems there are a lot of people would either like to melt him down or just to beat his brains out.:D

OMG, I had forgotten about Jason beating the statue. Hysterical! :biggrin:

[Suzee10]

OMG, I had forgotten about Jason beating the statue. Hysterical!

simpson's statues of himself just do not seem to fair well, even his own kid didn't like him and this was before the murders. Yes it was hysterical!!!
I can just see Jason wailing the daylights out of the statue, whack, whack and whack!:biggrin:

[martin II]

sassy hi
we talked about this before.

"The families of the two murder victims have agreed to split the proceeds, with 62.7 percent to go to Goldman's relatives and 37.3 percent to the survivors of Nicole Simpson.

An auction could be held as early as February. A lawyer for O.J. Simpson did not return a phone call seeking comment.

The agreement resolves a dispute as to which family has priority over the assets seized from O.J. Simpson's estate.--- A judge ruled last year that the families were "co-equal" to the assets, but Ronald Goldman's father, Fred, appealed that decision, said his lawyer Gary Caris. "----
------------------------------
Again Fred did not like the 50% 50% split as ordered by the judge between himself and the browns. He wanted MORE than the browns.Guess he figured Ron was more valuable than Nicole.

A total of $430,000 worth of items were taken and sold from Oj's home.
Heisman was sold for $230,000 fred got 62% browns got 37.7%


ALL THE ITEMS WERE SOLD BY THE COURT AND THE MONEY GIVEN TO BOTH FAMALIES.
martin II

[fbgweezer]

It is my understanding that the Estate of Nicole Brown (Nicole's two children) is party to the civil suit. It is wrong to continue to say the "Browns" are suing -- they are not.

[tazzybaby]

Hmmmm.......I wonder why the lawyer for LBA is acting so inappropriately??? Maybe they are freaking out a little bit about Arnelle's depo? They even filed an emergency delay.


Cristol ordered Whittle to remain in contact with the other lawyers in the case, who complained Monday that he has been virtually unreachable by telephone. That order, Cristol said, should be hand-delivered to Whittle's office.

"It's certainly not proceeding in a professional and civil manner," Cristol said of Whittle's actions.

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/florida/news-article.aspx?storyid=81613

[fbgweezer]

Hmmmm.......I wonder why the lawyer for LBA is acting so inappropriately??? Maybe they are freaking out a little bit about Arnelle's depo? They even filed an emergency delay.


Cristol ordered Whittle to remain in contact with the other lawyers in the case, who complained Monday that he has been virtually unreachable by telephone. That order, Cristol said, should be hand-delivered to Whittle's office.

"It's certainly not proceeding in a professional and civil manner," Cristol said of Whittle's actions.

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/florida/news-article.aspx?storyid=81613

maybe he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar? ;)

[Jayme K]

Hmmmm.......I wonder why the lawyer for LBA is acting so inappropriately??? Maybe they are freaking out a little bit about Arnelle's depo? They even filed an emergency delay.


Cristol ordered Whittle to remain in contact with the other lawyers in the case, who complained Monday that he has been virtually unreachable by telephone. That order, Cristol said, should be hand-delivered to Whittle's office.

"It's certainly not proceeding in a professional and civil manner," Cristol said of Whittle's actions.

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/florida/news-article.aspx?storyid=81613

Because everyone's about to find out that LBA is one big scam would be my guess.

[martin II]

It is my understanding that the Estate of Nicole Brown (Nicole's two children) is party to the civil suit. It is wrong to continue to say the "Browns" are suing -- they are not.

read the civil trial jury award form

martin II

[martin II]

Hmmmm.......I wonder why the lawyer for LBA is acting so inappropriately??? Maybe they are freaking out a little bit about Arnelle's depo? They even filed an emergency delay.


Cristol ordered Whittle to remain in contact with the other lawyers in the case, who complained Monday that he has been virtually unreachable by telephone. That order, Cristol said, should be hand-delivered to Whittle's office.

"It's certainly not proceeding in a professional and civil manner," Cristol said of Whittle's actions.

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/florida/news-article.aspx?storyid=81613

tazzy hi

If Mr Whittle has only one client. there is little excuse for not attending. But if he has multiple clients he could be in another court on a trial that was scheduled before the LBA matter.Happens all the time.
martin II

[martin II]

Because everyone's about to find out that LBA is one big scam would be my guess.

maby maby not.

wonder how Freds lawyers will get past the fact that a judge has ruled that Fred cannot have Oj's name and Image(trademark) if fred intends to sell the book if he gets it?
martin II

[fbgweezer]

wonder if orenthal's lawyer think it's worth their career to help orenthal hide his ill-gotten gains?

[socaldiva]

maby maby not.

wonder how Freds lawyers will get past the fact that a judge has ruled that Fred cannot have Oj's name and Image(trademark) if fred intends to sell the book if he gets it?
martin II

I think you are comparing apples with oranges here.

[martin II]

sassy hi
we talked about this before.

"The families of the two murder victims have agreed to split the proceeds, with 62.7 percent to go to Goldman's relatives and 37.3 percent to the survivors of Nicole Simpson.

An auction could be held as early as February. A lawyer for O.J. Simpson did not return a phone call seeking comment.

The agreement resolves a dispute as to which family has priority over the assets seized from O.J. Simpson's estate.--- A judge ruled last year that the families were "co-equal" to the assets, but Ronald Goldman's father, Fred, appealed that decision, said his lawyer Gary Caris. "----
------------------------------
Again Fred did not like the 50% 50% split as ordered by the judge between himself and the browns. He wanted MORE than the browns.Guess he figured Ron was more valuable than Nicole.

A total of $430,000 worth of items were taken and sold from Oj's home.
Heisman was sold for $230,000 fred got 62% browns got 37.7%


ALL THE ITEMS WERE SOLD BY THE COURT AND THE MONEY GIVEN TO BOTH FAMALIES.
martin II

here is the link requested.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9811/03/simpson.estate/index.html

[martin II]

read the civil trial jury award form

martin II

http://walraven.org/simpson/brn_suit.html

[fbgweezer]

read the civil trial jury award form

martin II

thanks for the link.

LOUIS H. BROWN as Executor and personal
representative of the Estate of NICOLE
BROWN SIMPSON, deceased,

Like I said, the Browns are not party to the suit.

[martin II]

thanks for the link.

LOUIS H. BROWN as Executor and personal
representative of the Estate of NICOLE
BROWN SIMPSON, deceased,

Like I said, the Browns are not party to the suit.

They are in the sense that they personally speak and act for the estate.imo
martin II

[jotun]

As for your statement about a judge ruling that Fred "can't have any future OJ earnings either", that's absurd. I don't know where you get your information, but it's wrong. imo

All:
NOT ABSURD
NOT WRONG

http:///www.fox19.com/global/story/asp?s=6115100&ClientType=Printable

In case it doesn't work.Here is the
sentence:

March 1 07 AP

But he[Judge Rosenburg] rejected the family's[goldmans] bid to collect Simpson's earnings on future projects.

jotun

[jotun]

Well, no link yet. Maybe later ;)

Link:
http://www.fox19.com/Global/Story.asp?S=
6115100nav=menu63_2

This must have been posted on this thread in March from the AP.

reads:
But he[judge rosenburg] rejected the family's bid to collect Simpson's earnings on future projects.

jotun

[jotun]

They are in the sense that they personally speak and act for the estate.imo
martin II

Martin,
IMO
Denise is always in the media talking but she has NO legal standing.And they are working against LBA which are Sydney and Justin.
Also Sydney & Justin could sue O.J. for wrongful death IFFFF they thought O.J.was guilty.
IMO

jotun

[socaldiva]

All:
NOT ABSURD
NOT WRONG

http:///www.fox19.com/global/story/asp?s=6115100&ClientType=Printable

In case it doesn't work.Here is the
sentence:

March 1 07 AP

But he[Judge Rosenburg] rejected the family's[goldmans] bid to collect Simpson's earnings on future projects.

jotun

Your link is not working.....

[socaldiva]

Link:
http://www.fox19.com/Global/Story.asp?S=
6115100nav=menu63_2

This must have been posted on this thread in March from the AP.

reads:
But he[judge rosenburg] rejected the family's bid to collect Simpson's earnings on future projects.

jotun

This link didn't work either....

[socaldiva]

*snip*
Also Sydney & Justin could sue O.J. for wrongful death IFFFF they thought O.J.was guilty.


They are young adults dependent on their Dads financial help & he's the only parent they have. Just because they don't sue, doesn't mean they don't think he's guilty. IIRC, the advance money from the book was supposed to be "for the kids", but Orenthal spent it.

[martin II]

jotun

i thouight i would share this link with you. notice what is said about no contact in CA. likeness is transfered to Florida.

http://www.nbc4.tv/news/10096984/detail.html
martinII

[martin II]

jotun

6:01 p.m. November 2, 2006

SANTA MONICA – O.J. Simpson has won a legal battle against the father of a murder victim who had sought control of the former football star's publicity rights to help satisfy a judgment in a wrongful death lawsuit.
Superior Court Judge Linda Lefkowitz rejected Fred Goldman's petition, determining such a move would harm a living celebrity's privacy rights “which mitigate against court-enforced transfer of the (publicity) right to obtain commercial profit from his or her likeness.”

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20061102-1801-ca-simpsonsuit.html

Based on the above judge's ruling that OJ Simpson retains the rights to his name and image, I am wondering how a 'IF I DID IT' book, or any other book title, (using oj simpsons name and image) could be published and sold by anyone , without the specific approval of OJ Simpson.

martin II

[martin II]

Link:
http://www.fox19.com/Global/Story.asp?S=
6115100nav=menu63_2

This must have been posted on this thread in March from the AP.

reads:
But he[judge rosenburg] rejected the family's bid to collect Simpson's earnings on future projects.

jotun

jotun

your link has expired i think. here is another.
It is my opinion that this issue is generally known.imo

AP | Posted February 21, 2007 10:00 AM

READ MORE: O. J. Simpson
A judge on Tuesday ordered that royalties or other earnings due former football star O.J. Simpson from his past work in movies, TV shows and commercials be paid directly to the family of murder victim Ron Goldman.

But the judge rejected a bid by Goldman's family to collect on Simpson's future earnings.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/02/21/judge-goldman-family-get_n_41749.html



martin II

[fbgweezer]

Based on the above judge's ruling that OJ Simpson retains the rights to his name and image, I am wondering how a 'IF I DID IT' book, or any other book title, (using oj simpsons name and image) could be published and sold by anyone , without the specific approval of OJ Simpson.

orenthal took the up-front money and signed over any remaining rights to the book.

[martin II]

orenthal took the up-front money and signed over any remaining rights to the book.

weezer
hi

i am puzzelled as to how your above post is a response to my linked statement. Is you post intended as a response to my post??
martin II

[fbgweezer]

weezer
hi

i am puzzelled as to how your above post is a response to my linked statement. Is you post intended as a response to my post??
martin II

I logically inferred that 'any future earnings' would mean anything orenthal retained his rights to. He signed away his rights to the book. But even saying that, I believe that the judge was referring to the likeness and endorsement, etc., and not the book.

[martin II]

I logically inferred that 'any future earnings' would mean anything orenthal retained his rights to. He signed away his rights to the book. But even saying that, I believe that the judge was referring to the likeness and endorsement, etc., and not the book.

weezer

Judge goldberg ruled that goldman can have past oj royalties due but no future earnings of oj simpson.
link
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/0...t_n_41749.html

Fred goldman asked judge lefkowitz to give him oj's trade mark name so that he could use is for himself and so that any monies oj makes from the use fo his name would go to goldman.

The judge said no.
link
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/s...mpsonsuit.html

Oj allowed his name image to be used in the now CANCELLED book contract.
It is my understand from the contract that if the book was not published and sold, the title goes to LBA on may 4 07. I am assuminmg that has occured.

Oj has owned and still owns these trademarks. It seems that anyone attempting to use them in any activity,