Murders Weren’t Fully Investigated, Simpson Declares

Forcefully reasserting his innocence in a wide-ranging interview at his home, O.J. Simpson said Monday that a limousine driver who testified against him was honest but mistaken about important facts, and he insisted that police have never properly investigated the murders of his ex-wife and her friend.

Specifically, Simpson said police had overlooked unanswered questions about drug use by Faye Resnick, a friend of Nicole Brown Simpson who wrote a book in which she made clear her belief that Simpson was the murderer.

“Did you ask her who delivered her her drugs?” Simpson asked. “Did you ask the police that question?”

Told that reporters had inquired about drug dealers in Brentwood, Simpson responded: “You say drug dealers in Brentwood. Was any one of them Faye’s drug dealer?”

He then refused to discuss the topic further, saying only that he was convinced that police had failed to follow up that avenue of investigation. “This is a real investigated case,” he said sarcastically.

Simpson’s interview with The Times took place after the newspaper published extensive excerpts from five days of his still incomplete deposition being conducted in civil wrongful-death suits growing out of the murders.

The interview was conducted in a quiet nook of his Brentwood home, without any of his legal advisors present. During the 90-minute session, he was occasionally defensive but more often accusatory. He charged that pundits, police and prosecutors have repeatedly misstated the evidence against him and have misled the public into thinking that he committed the June 12, 1994, murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Lyle Goldman.

Simpson has always maintained his innocence. He was acquitted of murder charges in October.

Police have long dismissed the Simpson defense team’s attempts to link the murders to drug dealers, and have said physical evidence from the scene does not suggest drugs as a motive for the killings. Nevertheless, Simpson’s advisors have repeatedly floated the drug theory, suggesting that a killer or killers might have come looking for Resnick and then stumbled upon the two victims.

Resnick said Simpson’s latest attack on her was baseless. “Nobody ever delivered drugs to me,” she said in an interview. “The remarks that O. J.’s making obviously are defamatory and they’re all untrue. He’s a desperate man. . . . This man slaughtered Nicole and Ron, and now he’s trying to make it Nicole’s fault.”

Paper’s Reports Disputed

Simpson, who wore a Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department boxing team cap during the interview, agreed to meet with two reporters from The Times after he complained in a live phone call to CNN about the paper’s exclusive reports on the sworn testimony he gave last month.

The Times, relying on the 1,534-page deposition transcript, said that Simpson had accused his ex-wife of fabricating incidents of domestic abuse and of abusing drugs and alcohol. Simpson, in the transcript, denied ever striking or choking his then-wife but conceded that he felt “responsible” for the injuries she suffered in a 1989 altercation that led to Simpson’s no-contest plea to spousal battery. Also in the transcript, he offered accounts of his movements on the night of the murders that clashed with testimony by limousine driver Allan Park.

Simpson, who accused his legal adversaries of leaking that deposition, said he had not, as reported by The Times, “discussed” suicide on the day that he failed to surrender to police as promised and took off with longtime friend Al Cowlings in a Ford Bronco with a gun, his passport, a large sum of money and a disguise. (In the transcript, asked if he had thoughts of suicide, he replied: “Yeah, I had thoughts of ending what I was feeling, yes.”)

He told CNN on Monday that he had begun carrying a gun two days after the murders and was not then intending to kill himself, but he acknowledged to The Times that he “probably would have contemplated it.”

Among his other complaints: He said a call to his ex-wife’s home on the evening of the murders was not to her but to his daughter Sydney--though Nicole Simpson answered the phone.

He insisted that his account did not contradict that of his onetime guest house tenant, Brian “Kato” Kaelin, who sparred with prosecutor Marcia Clark over how to describe Simpson’s demeanor before the killings. Simpson maintained that Kaelin had never described him as “upset,” but trial transcripts show that Kaelin did use that word, albeit reluctantly.

“Kato agreed with Marcia too much,” Simpson said Monday. “Kato’s a good guy and he likes people. Marcia pushed him a little bit.”

Simpson also took exception to The Times’ report that he turned over “at least” $10,000 in cash and thousands more in checks to Al Cowlings on the day he was supposed to surrender to authorities. On Monday, he said the checks and cash combined were worth “in the neighborhood of” $10,000. (In the deposition, Simpson testified that he turned over to Cowlings “as much as $10,000” and checks won in golf bets that “could have” totaled $5,000.)

And Simpson, who had outlined sections of The Times’ story in red ink even as he insisted that he did not follow the coverage of his case closely, disputed the paper’s characterization of his deposition as “grueling.”

“It was more tedium than anything,” said Simpson, who acknowledged that some of his criticisms were “nit-picking” but said he wanted to set the record straight.

Added Simpson: “I’m a little more sensitive than the average person.”

Inside the Estate

With reporters from local television stations posted outside his Rockingham Avenue estate--where police said they found the bloodstained glove and drops of blood they said linked Simpson to the murders--he fielded questions from The Times for 90 minutes. At times he stiffened at queries that suggested his guilt; at others, he bubbled with affability. About an hour into the session, his assistant, Cathy Randa, served soft drinks in glasses that featured pictures of Simpson wearing football gear.

Simpson sat at a glass-topped table near a bank of television sets, which were off, and in front of windows overlooking his verdant backyard and pool, where gardeners toiled and security guards strolled. Over his left shoulder was a set of photographs chronicling his storied football career, one that landed him in the Hall of Fame and brought him into contact with many of the nation’s most recognizable personalities.

Among those pictured in the home photo gallery are Richard Nixon, Jack Kemp, Joe Frazier, Muhammad Ali and Ava Gardner--all of them posed with Simpson.

Simpson had not requested the interview and did not allow a photographer to accompany two reporters from The Times. He dressed casually, wearing blue jeans and a blue and gray flannel shirt, untucked. On his left hand was a blue Hall of Fame ring, and sitting on a kitchen counter was a new paperback entitled “Legacy of Deception” with retired LAPD Det. Mark Fuhrman on its cover.

The session was uninterrupted except by Simpson, who ignored his constantly ringing phone but stopped at one point and removed the cassette tape being used to record the discussion. Saying he was concerned that the tape would end up being played on radio stations, Simpson at first refused to give it back. Then he relented, but insisted that the rest of the session not be recorded by The Times--though Simpson kept his own tape running.

Accompanied only by Randa, Simpson declined to answer some specific questions about the murders--refusing to discuss the blood and other physical evidence, for instance. Most such questions he rebuffed by saying that he would supply the answers in an upcoming videotape that will sell for $29.95.

“Call 1-800-OJTELLS,” Simpson responded several times when confronted with detailed questions about the evidence, such as the blood drops in his car that were genetically consistent with the blood of Goldman, whom Simpson has said he never met.

But Simpson, venturing for the first time into his assessment of some aspects of the case, said he believes that a small cadre of LAPD officers had set out to implicate him from the beginning.

Dets. Philip L. Vannatter and Tom Lange testified that they went to Simpson’s house to notify him of his ex-wife’s death. Once there, they said, a spot on Simpson’s car and their inability to contact anyone inside the house raised their fears that someone might be hurt inside. They then entered the property without a warrant. While looking over the grounds, Fuhrman testified, he found a bloody glove that matched one found at the crime scene.

Simpson, however, derided that story as a lie, saying that the detectives intended all along to search his property that morning.

“There’s no doubt that when Vannatter and Lange got here, they wanted to get inside my house,” said Simpson, his voice hardening with anger. “They did what they had to do.”

Simpson also insisted that Park, a limousine driver who took him to the airport hours after the murders, erred in recalling certain details such as the lighting outside Simpson’s house, the handling or appearance of his golf bag and the cars that were parked in the driveway--oversights that Simpson said undermined Park’s testimony, though not his fundamental honesty.

“This was an honest kid,” Simpson said. “I would never call him dishonest. I’d never say he fabricates. He was just wrong.”

Park’s testimony was considered a linchpin of the prosecution case, in part because he recalled times and events in great detail. Park testified that he arrived at Simpson’s home about 10:25 p.m. on the night of the murders and began ringing the buzzer at one of the gates about 10:40 p.m. He testified that he tried unsuccessfully to contact Simpson on and off for the next 15 minutes. According to Park, no one answered until after a shadowy figure entered the house about 10:55 p.m. Just a moment later, he rang the intercom buzzer again and a voice he recognized as Simpson’s said he had overslept, Park testified.

Simpson denied making that statement, and said he was showering and preparing to leave, not sleeping.

Throughout the interview, Simpson insisted that the prosecutors’ basic premise--that he killed his ex-wife in a final, desperate attempt to control her--was absurd.

“What motive would I have had?” he asked, adding that he had rebuffed his wife’s attempts at reconciliation. “If I had wanted to be married to her, I would have been married to her.”

Far from being distraught at their 1994 breakup, which came after an attempt at reconciliation following a divorce, Simpson said he welcomed it, was responsible for it and enjoyed it. The benefits, he said, even showed up in his golf game.

“My handicap went down a few strokes in May after we broke up,” he said with a chuckle.

In his deposition, which remains unfinished, Simpson told lawyers that his ex-wife drew up a list of false incidents of domestic abuse during their divorce. She did so, he said in the interview, because she was pressured by her lawyers and a counselor who were urging her to do something that might push Simpson into invalidating their prenuptial agreement.

But in the interview Simpson insisted he had not been “bashing Nicole” in the deposition and steadfastly maintained that he was not accusing his ex-wife of fabricating the allegations against him.

“It never went anywhere,” Simpson said of the list of alleged domestic-abuse incidents. “She never showed this to anyone. She never went into any court with this.”

Breaking Up With Nicole

Although Simpson insisted that the list his ex-wife drew up was laced with false accusations, he attributed it to the bitterness present in any divorce and credited her with stopping short of using it against him.

“Even in a divorce where anything goes, Nicole reached the point where she came over to discuss it with me,” Simpson said. “She told the lawyer she wouldn’t do it.” At another point, he stressed, “She would not perjure herself for anything, for any amount of money.”

But Simpson said one aspect of the public’s reaction to his relationship with Nicole Simpson continues to trouble him: an unwillingness on the part of some people to accept that it was he, not she, who finally broke it off.

In a rare reference to the racial tensions that have long undergirded the explosive case, Simpson said: “There’s a group of people talking about a black guy lusting after a beautiful white woman. That’s not right. She wanted to move back in--that’s the fact.”

Simpson never took the stand at his criminal trial, but ever since his acquittal, he has seemed eager to offer his version of events.

Simpson’s interview with The Times was the latest in a string of unexpected public comments by the former football star. Immediately after the verdicts, he placed calls to the New York Times, television interviewer Larry King and Associated Press, each time avoiding virtually all detailed discussion of the case.

Last month, he granted a longer interview to Black Entertainment Television but again ducked all issues related to the case. And on Monday, Simpson gave not one but two interviews--one to The Times and the other to CNN.

In his interview with CNN, Simpson similarly suggested that the murders were connected to Resnick, not to him.

“Let me put it this way,” said Simpson, who spoke by telephone to commentators from the network. “I have no doubt in my mind, no doubt whatsoever, that the answer to these murders are in the world of Faye Resnick.”

Leading criminal and civil attorneys agreed that Simpson’s propensity to go it alone with the media creates formidable additional complexities for the lawyers defending him in his civil suit.

“What does it mean when you have a client who not only doesn’t follow your advice, but also doesn’t bother to consult you?” wondered defense attorney Gerald L. Chaleff, who has represented clients in numerous high-publicity cases. “It is incredibly frustrating and normally devastating to their case.”

Dennis Elber, a former public defender and now a prominent civil attorney, was even more pointed: “Everything he’s doing would drive me crazy,” he said. “He seems intent on going on the record to give the other side more ammunition than there may be court days. It does not appear that O. J. Simpson understands that by attempting to do it himself, he is doing it to himself.”

As Simpson met with reporters at his home, depositions in the civil suits against him continued just a few miles away. And during breaks in that process, attorney Michael A. Brewer, who represents Ronald Goldman’s mother, Sharon Rufo, appeared to taunt Simpson over his interviews.

“As a plaintiff’s lawyer, you’re always happy to see the defendant out there making statements,” Brewer said. “The more statements he makes, the more trouble he is going to have explaining away the statements at the time of trial.”

Trial in the civil case is scheduled to begin April 2. On Monday, Simpson’s lawyers took the deposition of Goldman’s sister, Kim. Lawyers for Simpson asked her whether her brother had used drugs, participants said.

According to Kim Goldman, Simpson’s lawyers were trying to probe into her brother’s life, asking about his friends and attempting to raise “ridiculous rumors that have been floating that have no validity at all.”

The full scope of the questioning was not disclosed. But in wrongful-death cases, family members often are quizzed about how close the relationships within the family were, in order to assess the degree of loss--and potential financial damages.

Anger at TV Reporter

Back at Rockingham, Simpson seemed generally comfortable at being questioned, but displayed a flash of anger when his assistant passed him a note from KABC-TV Channel 7 reporter John North asking for a chance to speak with him. The same reporter, Simpson said, had once suggested that Simpson was coached for his public pronouncement that he was “absolutely 100% not guilty.”

“You tell John North . . . that no one has ever coached me on what to say,” Simpson told Randa. “John McKay and Lou Saban coached me,” he added, referring to his USC and Buffalo Bills football coaches.

He was far more pointed in his attacks on the police and prosecutors. Members of the prosecution team encouraged witnesses to alter their accounts, he said, specifically citing Cora Fishman, a friend of Nicole with whom Simpson has remained close.

“They [prosecutors] were trying to hone what she said,” he charged. “She wouldn’t agree to what they wanted her to say. . . . That’s why she didn’t testify.”

Suzanne Childs, a spokeswoman for the district attorney’s office, said her office’s policy is not to comment on specific evidence and thus would not respond to Simpson’s allegation.

On an even more personal note, Simpson accused Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti of engineering the public release of material that would hurt Simpson’s case. According to Simpson, Garcetti knew that there was no evidence of spousal abuse other than the 1989 incident.

But Simpson bitterly accused Garcetti of orchestrating the release of a 1993 call to 911 to suggest that his relationship with Nicole Simpson was more violent than it actually was. In the 1993 incident, Simpson screamed at his ex-wife and kicked in a door but did not strike her.

Monday, Childs said Garcetti had not even participated in the release of the tape, much less helped orchestrate it to disadvantage Simpson.

“We did not release it,” said Childs, adding that her office has commented on the tapes issue in the past and she was therefore free to refute it. “We were not aware at the time that a tape existed. . . . When Gil found out, he was angry.”

Praise for Sheriff’s Department

Though Simpson disparaged the district attorney’s office and the LAPD, he expressed great fondness for the Sheriff’s Department. Some deputies predicted his acquittal early on, he said, adding that he would donate any money he could to Sheriff’s Department causes in the future.

But his animus toward the LAPD runs deep, stretching beyond the murder case to its handling of the domestic violence allegations against him.

He accused one of the officers who came to his home in response to the 1989 incident of intentionally drafting a misleading police report. In his report, the officer indicated that Simpson told him police had come to the house on previous occasions but had never done anything. According to the officer, Simpson seemed incredulous that the police would now choose to arrest him for what he viewed as a family matter.

But Simpson insisted Monday that he did not tell the officer that police had come to his house on previous occasions because of domestic abuse allegations. Rather, he said, the earlier visits were by officers seeking autographs or attention from the popular football star.

As Simpson continues to wage a battle against pundits and others who believe he committed the murders for which he was acquitted, he nevertheless insisted that he wants nothing more than to be left alone to raise his children.

“I don’t have a P.R. department working for me,” he said. “I want to be left alone. I want to raise my kids.”

He acknowledged that it will be difficult in light of the attention that remains focused on him. On Monday alone, more than a dozen reporters and passersby congregated outside his Rockingham Avenue gate, now boarded to keep people from peering at the grounds.

But Simpson said he usually is greeted warmly, and he expressed optimism that someday another culprit may be identified, a development that he said would bring his family peace and would allow him the final word against his tormentors.

“I believe in my heart eventually this will be solved,” he said near the end of the interview as he escorted the reporters from his home. “Let’s see what the pundits say then.”

Times staff writer Duke Helfand contributed to this article.