ALMOST EIGHTEEN YEARS AGO, I began assembling a team consisting of my own agency and its resources, along with an international group of distinguished experts in the investigative fields of forensics, pathology, and crime scene to look into the brutal murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman on the night of June 12, 1994.
The legal process of this case had left me with more questions than answers and a feeling, shared by many, that justice had not been served and the truth had not been uncovered, in spite of two “trials of the century” that consumed endless man-hours, millions of taxpayer dollars, and the riveted attention of most of the nation.
My purpose in what became a long journey was not just to write another O.J. book but to seek the truth, just as I have done in every other murder case I have investigated, even though I was aware I would be fighting odds stacked heavily against me. My experience over the past forty-five years has been that when facts in a case are uncovered which could disprove the original theory, no one wants to admit they could have been wrong. Too many interests are vested in preserving the original conclusions. So I knew I would face many challenges.
I am a private investigator who had to take the road back into the murders the hard way. I am neither a police officer nor a member of the district attorney’s office. I do not have the power of subpoena, the right to take depositions, or the right to arrest. That’s why my methods sometimes have to be unorthodox. I have had to follow twisted paths and employ some of the same clandestine and controversial evidence-gathering tactics as those used by investigative journalists.
Beyond the wide-ranging expertise and experience of my team and my own determination, the crucial equipment I possess—more gift than tool—is my ability to enter, intuitively, into the mind of a killer. I had successfully solved other “unsolvable” murder cases in this way and I felt certain it could be helpful in this case. This ability to intimately understand—to experience the killer and his acts—is a double-edged sword, because as the investigator moves deeper into the killer’s mind, a pit can open into the darkness, alienation, and pain. This kind of journey is a high-risk endeavor, precisely because of the need for that intuitive leap, and because the intricate maneuverings and elusiveness of the target can draw the investigator toward preoccupation. More than once on the journey, I had to resist that pull.
It also requires a laser insight into the complexity of human relationships . . . into the intricate ties of friends and lovers, of marriage and parenthood that bind people in mysterious, profound ways. To begin my investigation I made a list of all the suspects whom I felt could possibly be involved. From this, I narrowed, gradually and painstakingly, my investigation down to a single major suspect. If I am wrong, it is not out of any intent or malice. The road to truth was a hard one, and many times I wanted to quit, especially as I drew closer to the end. You see, it was not, nor has it ever been, my intention to hurt anyone. However, sometimes the search for truth leaves no alternative.
I have been asked why I did not turn over my investigative report to the proper authorities once it was completed. I tried many times to pursue justice through full disclosure to the appropriate officials, as you will read. But due to the sensitivity of the information uncovered, along with the potential embarrassment it might bring to those involved in the O.J. Simpson murder trial, I felt my findings might well wind up buried in the political labyrinth of the legal system.
My years of experience as a private investigator taught me, in this particular case, it would now be prudent to release this new information to the general public, allowing you to decide the merits of the investigation without bias. I hope that your support of my investigative report, along with a completely new approach to the tragic events of June 12, 1994, offered by evidence our team has uncovered, can serve as a catalyst to the reopening of the investigation into the murders of two vital young people.
It is my personal goal that the information I have brought to light will lead to the convening of a special grand jury, an arrest, and a conviction for these senseless murders.
At the original trial, you had no way to voice your opinions. If you are convinced, as I am, that this new information supports a reopening of the case, I urge you to rally behind me. Go to our website, www.ojisinnocentandicanproveit.com, and cast your ballot. Do not take this lightly. With your help, justice could prevail and finally bring the truth to the families and friends of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, thanks to you.
Remember this, in my seventeen-year investigation into the murders I do not hesitate in making this statement:
“O.J. is innocent—I can prove it!”
I leave it up to you, as a reader and now a juror, to make a decision.
How do you find O.J. Simpson?
Guilty or not guilty?
William C. Dear
Mount Calm, Texas
2012