NATIONAL ENQUIRER, 10/26/93
BACKGROUND: In her book, Nicole Brown Simpson, The Private Diary of a Life Interrupted, Faye Resnick describes an incident related to an article in the National Enquirer supermarket tabloid. She says
This was in October , just as Nicole and I were leaving to join O.J. for the grand opening of the Harley-Davidson Café in Manhattan.
Nicole and I were in a limousine on the way to the L.A. airport when the driver told us he had a message from O.J. Nicole was to pick up the Enquirer at the airport, so we grabbed a copy and read the story after take-off. We were stunned! The details about the reconciliation were so accurate a member of the inner circle must have leaked them.
I said, Nicole, all this stuff is coming from someone really close to you. They even use your exact words here.
Nicole was stupefied. Yeah, somebodys giving them information, somebody really close. Its got to be from the inner circle itself.
The Enquirer story mentioned the 1989 battering charge against O.J., the one O.J. screamed about in the famed 911 tape
DATES: A photo in Resnicks book identifies the Harley-Davidson opening as having been October 13, 1993. From the narrative in the book, the incident in the limo occurred the previous afternoon, October 12. We have found a National Enquirer article which we show below, and which contains exactly the kind of material that Resnick describes. However this article is in an edition dated October 26, and that may seem to be at conflict with a claim that it was bought on the 12th.
Mainstream periodicals are traditionally given a publication date of the LAST date on which they are on sale, so a weekly (like Newsweek) that hits the news stands on the first of a month will bear a date of the seventh. The idea is to help the buyer to believe that he is buying fresh news. These days, supermarket tabloids follow the same standards, but in the early 90s they kept two editions on the stands at the same time, and when one first appeared, it was dated 14 days later.
So, it is possible that Nicole bought a copy of the National Enquirer on October 12th that had a publication date of October 26 exactly two weeks hence. Especially if it was then so fresh on the stands that she had been alerted to it by a phone message as she was.
Also notice that at the time (October 25, 1993) that Simpson broke down Nicoles back door on Gretna Green, raged at her, and caused her to make the infamous 911 call, this issue of the Enquirer was still on the stands. The idea that something in this article was the cause of Simpsons outrage at that time is quite credible.
THE ARTICLE: This is apparently the article that Resnick was referring to
O.J. Simpson and wife he battered are madly in love again -- & talking marriage --
Football great O.J. Simpson and his battered ex-wife are finding love really is lovelier the second time around -- they're dating up a storm and even talking remarriage! Incredibly, Nicole Brown Simpson has welcomed O.J. back into her arms even though the muscular sports hero once beat her so badly she was forced to seek hospital treatment.
Their rocky seven-year marriage ended in a bitter divorce last October. But pals say the battling Simpsons buried the hatchet six months ago for the sake of their two young children. The two recently realized they'd fallen in love all over again -- and now Nicole is wearing her old engagement ring. "O.J. and Nicole are back in each other's arms for good," confided a source close to the couple. "All their friends are shocked. But O.J. and Nicole don't give a hoot about what anyone else thinks."
Nicole, 33, filed for divorce in February 1992, citing "irreconcilable differences." But the blonde beauty -- O.J.'s second wife -- told pals she really split from O.J. because he was cheating with so many women that she was terrified he'd get AIDS. They'd battled over O.J.'s skirt chasing for years. One fight in January 1989 became so heated that police were called to the couple's home after O.J. punched, slapped and kicked his wife and yelled, "I'll kill you." At the time, Nicole sought hospital treatment for bruises on her face and neck. O.J., 46, pleaded no contest to a wife beating charge and was sentenced to two years probation.
When they divorced, Nicole kept the couple's $550,000 San Francisco condo and received a lump-sum payment of $433,750. She also gets $10,000 a month child support for their daughter Sydney, 8, and son Justin, 5. After they split up, O.J. dated leggy brunette model Paula Barbieri. But he tried to stay close to his children.
"About six months ago, O.J. called Nicole and asked if they could be friends for the children's sake," said the source. "They agreed to spend more time together as a family. They went on picnics, saw movies and even vacationed together. "About a month ago, O.J. stopped by Nicole's apartment as the kids were getting ready for bed. "As he tucked Sydney in, she said, "I love you, Daddy. I wish that you would be here when I wake up every morning.' O.J.'s heart melted.
"Later he and Nicole sat down in the living room. After they chatted awhile, O.J. said, 'Baby, I was a fool to let you slip through my fingers. You're the best thing that ever happened to me. I'll always love you.' Nicole was absolutely speechless."
The next night Nicole invited O.J. over for dinner after the kids were in bed -- and greeted him in a sexy new outfit. Since then, Nicole and O.J. -- an NBC sportscaster -- have been seeing each other regularly. "He's even talked Nicole into wearing her engagement ring again -- and promised to buy her an even larger rock if they tie the knot," said the source.
The couple jetted off to Aspen Colo., for a romantic getaway in early October. But Nicole is going slow, sources say. "He'd marry me tomorrow if I wanted to. My heart says yes, but my head says slow down," she told a pal. "Im just telling O.J., 'We've got nothing but time to get this thing right.'"
--JEROME GEORGE and
ANALYSIS: At first glance, this appears to be rather ordinary tabloid fare: an insiders glimpse of a celebritys life, sensationalized and personalized to make it sound like juicy gossip concerning somebody down the block. There does not appear to be any blockbuster in here that was not also publicized during the criminal trial.
It is at least rather thoroughly researched: the specific details about the resolution of the wife beating case in 1989 seem to be right, and the financial details of the divorce settlement are quite specific -- and correct. Maybe a good researcher could get this information out of the public record, but a thing that is not in there is Nicoles true reason for divorcing Simpson -- her fear that his philandering would bring him AIDS. That is a rather personal detail, and -- before the murders, at least -- was probably known only to her inner circle. Also, the last paragraph in which Nicole summarizes her own attitude about a re-marriage, is certainly something that was probably not generally known.
So, if this article had any significance at all to OJ and Nicole, it appears to be exactly the significance that Resnick alleges: it reveals in a shocking way that people very close to Nicole can not be trusted to keep her confidence, and in fact anything Nicole says to anybody can find its way into the national press. Also, since the request to buy a copy came from OJ on the first day of availability, there is an implication that Simpson himself had not seen the article, but had only heard about it, and heard from somebody who knew it was pending and was watching for it. And, the fact of Nicoles loose-tongued friends was of concern to him.
LEAK CITY: The reader here should understand that half of the material in a tabloid is planted by professional rivals of the subject, old enemies, publicists trying to make a client into a household name If it were not for planted information, tabloids could not survive.
So, there is a good possibility that this article was planted, particularly in view of the insider information it contains. The objective of planting the article would probably have been to produce exactly the effect it did produce to demonstrate to OJ and Nicole quite vividly that Nicoles friends could not be trusted with sensational information, and in that way cause Nicole to clam up about very personal matters that the planters did not want her to reveal. If there were compelling events in Nicoles life in October 93 (as I believe there were) then the publication of this article would serve to keep them secret from her friends.
(Also notice that the article identifies Nicole as being 33 years old. At the time this was published, Nicole was 34 years old, and had been for almost six months -- dob 5/19/59. So, we have the curious situation where the article gets exactly right obscure details like a $433,750 divorce settlement, but does not get right the age of the subject of the article. This is a hint that the details were leaked to the authors who then did a sloppy job of fleshing it out with background facts.)
RESULTS OF THE ARTICLE: But, this article does a bit more than just to caution Nicole and OJ to keep quiet. It sets the scene for later events by portraying OJ as a sentimental brute, and Nicole as a plucky victim. Most interestingly, it contains a purported quote in which OJ tells Nicole, I'll kill you. How prophetic, eh? It is a wonder that this tabloid article did not find its way into Dardens case. This may be another example of a part of the killers plan that did not mature as they had hoped.
Furthermore, this article serves to create antagonism between OJ and Nicole. If the subject which is to be hushed-up is something that would threaten Simpsons public reputation (e.g., his cooperation with mob sports-gamblers) then he would be angry at the prospect of Nicole (unwittingly) exposing him. And, Nicole would be defensive and angry at OJ for having made a cause for exposure in the first place. Notice that this period (October 93) coincides with the point in which the Nicole/OJ reconciliation took a turn for the bad. Before that time (according to Wellers book and Resnicks) things were pretty much lovey-dovey between the couple, and after that they began to fight, and drift into separate lives. (As late as early October, according to this Enquirer article, the couple engaged in a romantic getaway to Aspen, but by the end of the month OJ was raising hell and Nicole was calling the cops.) In her book, Barbieri says that OJ began to re-establish his relationship with her (on the sly) in the fall of 93, and by January of 94 Nicole had changed her residence and was building a new life involving some new friends.
Finally, there is the relationship of this article to the infamous 911 call (as Faye says there is a relationship). Although Nicoles call for police help has been portrayed as caused by Simpsons jealous rage at finding pictures of other men in Nicoles home, the few of his words that can be made out on the tape more refer to her friends, and their untrustworthiness. And, one of Nicoles specific complaints to the police dispatcher is that OJ has taken her address book and wont give it back. (Also, the incident was not a friendly visit that turned ugly, as it would have been if Simpson found some pictures of old boyfriends in her house when he was there for friendly reasons. Simpson came to the altercation loaded for bear. When the police arrived they found his Bronco double parked in the street, and Nicoles back door had been kicked in and splintered. This more suggests that Simpson had receive information that threw him into a rage against Nicole sufficient to get up, go to her house, and have it out with her over a subject that involved the names in her address book.) This is further indication that Simpsons rage concerned her friends, and the danger they might pose. And, of course, Simpson was still on that theme a year later when he wrote I Want to Tell You, where he denounced Resnick and Nicoles other new friends as somehow related to the cause of Nicoles murder.
A NARROW FOCUS: At least George and Robinson (the articles authors) can have the thrill of knowing that they had contact, years ago, with a person (their source) who was connected with the conspiracy responsible for these ghastly crimes. But, they are tabloid writers; what do they care about justice?
(Article may have been planted to keep Nicole and OJ mum about a dispute with the planters.)
Dick Wagner ˇ Van Nuys, CA (6/21/02) enquirer.doc