Jump to content

Talk:Nicole Brown Simpson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 88.110.66.241 (talk) at 22:42, 19 June 2019. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Untitled

Does anyone have actual information about Nicole Brown Simpson? What was her occupation? - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 18:36, Jun 9, 2004 (UTC)

She was a waitress in a Beverly Hills nightclub before meeting OJ. I'll add that info. Also, Denise is older than Nicole, not younger. Sara

Nightclub waitress or country club waitress? there is a difference.

Rewrite

I've rewritten the entire article with what I think is a more biographical tone. I removed several bits of info that were of relevance only to the trial, and added a line directing readers to O.J.'s article. I also removed the {stub} template, bc I don't think there's much more to be said about her. Eaglizard 11:24, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Someone might want to fix that "O.J. did it." line at the end and at least specify in which cases he was acquitted (criminal) and in which he was found liable, at least monetarily (civil suit). And the description of the law-related discrepencies can be relegated to the appropriate Wikipedia entires on the various law suits and how the American justice system works. The case was a sensitive issue, so maybe the words in this article should be more appropriate so as not to offend anyone. Also, it's just unprofessional to write something so blunt and unsubstantiated as "O.J. did it" based off of personal hunches like "We all know who did it..." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.135.55.85 (talk contribs) 18:21, 3 November 2006

How come there isn't anymore biographical information about her childhood? Also, there is no information about how her relationship with O.J. started while he was already married and she was still a teenager. I guess I just figured it would be in here. Her bio just seems so vague.Dctoast (talk) 02:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this in the the category: unsolved murders?

We all know who murdered her. Just because "the authorities" in your country consider it unsolved doesn't mean wikipedia does, by this logic the Tiananmen Square Massacre article should also be deleted.--Steven X 07:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

shut up. you're probably redneck or a racist. No we don't KNOW who did it.70.185.125.101 20:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a redneck or racist, to suggest that is borish and petty.--Steven X 07:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Political Correctness, possibly. There are a lot of people who view this as a civil rights issue and are convinced OJ was framed.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmw0000 (talk • contribs)
O.J. was found guilty in the civil trial, and held legally (monetarily) responsible for Nicole's death. However, in the criminal trial, he was not found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt (i.e., he was held to be "not guilty" by a jury). So, there is some basis for categorizing Nicole's murder as being unsolved. That said, we all know who killed her...—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.175.243.151 (talk • contribs)

no we don't and you need to SIGN your comments.70.185.125.101 20:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay dokey.--Steven X 04:35, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

indeed. it's a fallacious appeal to authority to consider it to be a 'unsolved murder'. of course, as somebody above notes, we don't know absolutely; but we don't know anything absolutely. the nature of knowledge makes absolute certainty impossible in all cases, and of course that's the same in this case. however, it should be obvious to us that there's a need to push these pure epistemological concerns aside if we're to respond to the world in any sort of practical way.

the argument that there would be something wrong in saying that OJ simpson was the murderer is rooted in the idea he was legally acquitted. this is absurd, and irrationally puts far too much faith in the US legal system. it's probably no surprise that people have done so, given that most people used to this deference to authority on a daily basis AND the lion's share of english language wikipedians will be from the US themselves.

however, it's absurd and baseless. the tienanmen square article example is a good one, and hopefully reflecting upon that (why you'd trust the word of one government to be absolute while rightly deciding to search for genuine truth against the word of another) should help reveal your own biases. it's very much possible to have committed murder and be found innocent; the workings of a jury are of no consequence for wikipedia when it comes to determining fact. if OJ simpson is considered to be the killer, which he is, then he must be recorded as such (obviously, a specific source must be hunted down merely to satisfy the formal rules). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.13.181.16 (talk) 21:09, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of Nicole dead

Is it really necessary to have a photo of a dead Nicole on the page? Shouldn't there at least be a head shot of her as well?Why woold anyone hurt her?

i think it is, so we can better understand the investigation. They were decapitated yet nothing here was said about it.70.185.125.101 20:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good lord - have some respect for the dead and don't show their dead bodies. It's not proper etiquite at the very least to show a dead body and incredibly disresprectful.24.215.162.163 04:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is, because there are no photos of the alleged throat gash she had, and for the Ron Goldman page, there are no pics of him. That would be gruesome. This is mildER. I put them back, there should be a debate on this though. I vote yes for dead Nicole pictures, not to disrespect her, I have tons of respect for the family for how they've handled it, but for investigative purposes. and for the people who actually want to see them Catherine Woods 02:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

There should at least be a picture of her while alive. The article is about a once-living person and her life. That picture might belong in an article titled "The body of Nicole Brown Simpson" but not in an article about the woman. A person is not their dead body.Arizona1983 03:27, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Picture voting

Vote here if you want the images on or off the talk page:

User:Sarah Goldberg- Yes

AlexanderKO- Yes

Anton1234- If yes means keep, then Yes

Arizona1983- Take it off. It is not necessary to show her dead in an article about her life. Include it on the page dealing with the trial and investigation, not her biographical page.

I think those pictures are more suitable for some article about the murders.
PS: Wikipedia:Polls are evil
208.127.59.165 02:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CobraBK Remove them, they are unnecessary on this page. They are ok for O. J. Simpson murder case --CobraBK 10:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What picture? I like her picture and I don't see her dead pic anywhere! Punkymonkey987 05:11, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm...

A little ironic that one of her names is brown, yet she is obviously caucasian. Look into that and find a source.\

Hmm, not really, I used to have an autralian classmate in high school named Jessica Brown (sorry Jessica if you see this). Punkymonkey987 05:10, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Her name can't be Brown because her skin isn't brown?! Are you kidding?! I'm thinking that was a racist comment to be honest. Notice how it wasn't signed? Hmmm. Sky83 (talk) 17:24, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

-Comment removed (racism).-

Date Raped?

According to the CBS network's documentary that aired tonight, Nicole's family asked why her jeans were ripped when she returned home at 2 A.M. after her first date with OJ Simpson. According to the testimony, she replied that he was "a little forceful." The male family member said this was unacceptable and she replied "but I really like him." I don't know if the many books and tabloids have already covered this, but this seems to show that violence began very early on in their 'relationship.' 98.67.0.133 (talk) 03:19, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

She was killed, more accurately she was murdered!

Murdered either way you want to do the maths. --Simon19800 (talk) 07:37, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nicole Brown Simpson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:21, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of OJ with his baby

I think the photo should be removed because the woman on the photo is not Nicole Brown Simpson but the photographers spouse. Therefore relevance to this article is questionable. Chaptagai (talk) 21:03, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sexist descriptions

No one should be described as being "the wife of" in the first line. I do not know anything about her but those who know should at least mention her occupation, even if it is being a witress, before the fact of being married to somebody. Too typical description by women. Let's stop that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.4.248.2 (talk) 00:01, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, "Bruce Jenner" is not the name Caitlyn Jenner uses anymore. Should be updated among the mourners to avoid deadnaming her. Nick W. 2601:204:D502:1837:704B:DF71:9EFC:4704 (talk) 04:31, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions

I have seen that Lee Harvey Oswald has been named as John F. Kennedy's killer on Wikipedia; I suggest the same be done to O.J. Simpson and name him as the killer of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Lyle Goldman. Wikipedia is a mainstream encyclopedia so this article presents the accepted version of the events according to reliable sources. Various sources (Vincent Bugliosi, Jeffrey Toobin) have resulted in the consensus that reliable sources state that O.J. Simpson murdered Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Lyle Goldman. If you disagree with the current status, you are welcome to bring your concerns to the article talk page. The legal contexts of "burden of proof" and "presumption of innocence" apply to someone who is being tried for a crime. Although Simpson was found not guilty in a court of law, reliable sources firmly establish his culpability.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nicole_Brown_Simpson&oldid=902597879"