Right now I am reading John Douglas' book Journey into Darkness where he goes through a lot of interesting cases. The chapter that I find the most exciting is the one called Murder on S. Bundy Drive in which he profiles the killer of Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman. The murder happened on June 12 1994 and both victims were stabbed to death in front of Nicole's condominium.
Her two children were asleep in the upstairs bedroom.
Nicole's ex-husband, O.J. Simpson, the former American football star and actor, stood trial for the murders and was acquitted to many people's amazement. Simpson had been stalking and harassing his ex-wife and records show that they had a very troubled relationship up until the murders.
I'm going to go through some of the points that John Douglas makes in his book because I find them really interesting.
1. The murders occurred outside Nicole's house so Nicole was the primary target of the attack. If the kill wanted to attack Goldman, he would have done so while he was alone and not waited until he was with another person. Also looking at the injuries, Nicole was murdered almost in a military style having her throat slit and after that there was a lot of overkill which also leads to a very personal type of murder.
2. The crime scene seemed both organized and disorganized meaning that something happened that the killer had not expected. Perhaps Nicole was alone to begin with and Goldman entered the scene while the attack took place and therefore the killer had to attack him also. This would have been unexpected and the attack on Goldman was less personal than the one on Nicole. Goldman were stabbed because the killer had to eliminate him - Nicole was stabbed because the kill wanted to eliminate her. You can see that by the overkill done to Nicole. The killer brought a cap, gloves and a knife to the scene so he was obviously planning to murder or attack Nicole but Ronald Goldman put up a big fight and the killer cut his own hand in the process.
3. There has been speculation that this was done by a hit man but Douglas points out that the crime scene points to an unexperienced killer who left the gloves and the cap behind. Also it could not have been done by a rapist because there was no sexual assault. Could it have been a robber? Douglas says no. Nothing was taken from the house and there were no problems with burglaries in that particular area. Also a burglar does not normally bring a knife to the scene. Burglars rarely attack people, they will do so only if they are cornered and they will pick a weapon that does not require up and personal contact because they just want to get the hell out of there, to quote John Douglas. They'd rather use a gun.
4. This is what Douglas thinks happened: Goldman has dropped by Nicole's house and the killer has been stalking Nicole for while. He sees the two of them together and he becomes enraged but the fact that he brought the gloves and the knife does show that he intended to attack Nicole. Goldman tries to calm the man down but the killer whacks Nicole over the head, then proceeds to attack Goldman in order to neutralize him and then he returns to Nicole and murders her. He then goes back to Goldman to make sure that he is dead which would also indicate that this is not a professional hit man - he has to be certain that his victim is dead. Goldman is stabbed more times than Nicole but the attack on her is personal and her head is almost severed from her body.
5. It has also been speculated that this might be a murder like the Tate/La Bianca murders committed by the Manson family but John Douglas says that in a cult situation you would expect symbolism at the scene, like messages written on walls or doors and there was nothing like that at the Goldman/Brown murder scene.
6. In Nicole's house there were knives on the kitchen table which would suggest that she had been anticipating a threat. Nothing shows that Goldman was the target but Nicole had a controlling ex-husband who had been harassing her and beating her. Nicole was extremely scared of knives which would also indicate that she was attacked by a person who knew her and would know this fact about her.
O. J. Simpson has played a Navy SEAL on TV and would therefore be trained in military style attacks. Douglas says that if the killer had not been interrupted by Goldman, he would have probably staged the crime scene to look like a rape and he would have probably called somebody to say that he was worried about Nicole and somebody needed to check on her. He would have gotten back home in plenty of time to pull off his alibi.
7. Douglas believes that Simpson's behavior after the murders were not consistent with the behavior of an innocent person. O.J. did not show any remorse at the death of his ex-wife and he did not become outraged when he was arrested as an innocent person would.
8. Douglas sums up at the end of the chapter that behavior is consistent and none of the evidence suggested that Nicole and Ron were murdered by anybody other than Nicole's ex-husband.
I find it really fascinating that John Douglas can read a crime scene like that and point to the suspicion that most people had at the time of the murders: O.J. did it. Douglas does not come right out and say it, of course, but he does say that nothing points to the conclusion that anybody else did it.
I would love to hear your opinion on it. Who did it?