O.J. Simpson is about to be a free man once again.
Simpson has been granted parole by a unanimous vote the Nevada Board of Parole Commissioners, and is eligible to walk out the gates of Lovelock Correctional Facility by Oct. 1 of this year. Simpson had been found not guilty of the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman in 1995, and the attention surrounding this parole hearing echoed the frenzy that surrounded that mid-‘90s cultural touchstone.
Simpson has spent the last nine years as an inmate at Lovelock following his conviction on a range of charges arising from a September 2007 robbery. Simpson had conspired with several others to reclaim some of his own memorabilia, and broke into a Vegas hotel room where a memorabilia dealer was staying.
During the course of the six-minute invasion, Simpson ordered his associates to prevent anyone from leaving the room while another man brandished a gun. That was enough to get Simpson hit with both kidnapping and weapons charges in addition to assault and robbery, for a total of 12 counts. A Nevada judge sentenced Simpson to nine to 33 years in prison.
Parole hearings in Nevada require the inmate to meet a range of conditions for behavior both prior to incarceration and while in prison. Inmates are scored according to their actions and their likelihood for backsliding once released. The lower the score, the better the news for the inmate.
Simpson had sought, and received, parole for the weapons charges in 2013. Thursday’s format was similar: a meeting with the board members, via video conference, at which Simpson, gray-haired but looking far more slim and fit than he had in his previous hearing, offered up a defense of himself over the course of a 75-minute hearing that veered from defensive to casual, but rarely contrite.
A few highlights from the hearing:
• Connie Bisbee, chairman of the board, began the hearing with some light humor, noting that this hearing was far more crowded than any other in memory. Bisbee initially misidentified Simpson as 90, leading to tension-breaking laughter. (That wasn’t the only curious aspect of the hearing; Commissioner Adam Erdel wore a Kansas City Chiefs tie, an interesting choice given Simpson’s previous occupation.)
• In response to a question about why he committed the robbery, Simpson noted that much of the memorabilia that was at the center of the robbery wasn’t simply devoted to his on-field activities, but also included family albums and other photographs with personal value.
“These were friends of mine,” he said of the men holding the memorabilia, “men who helped me move and store this stuff.” Simpson then walked through the robbery, noting that he entered the Las Vegas hotel room containing the memorabilia because one of his associates had a key, and that Simpson only wanted what he said was his own property, not any of the other material in the room. Simpson appeared to be re-litigating his case, seeking to clarify, and justify, his own perspective on the robbery.
“Nobody’s ever accused me of pulling a weapon on them,” Simpson said. “I wasn’t trying to steal from anybody, and I would never pull a weapon on anybody.”
• When asked how he’d changed in prison, Simpson indicated that he had taken courses on reducing violence in confrontations. He added that he has mediated many disputes in the prison by using nonviolent techniques, and said he helped create a Baptist service in the prison.
“I was always a good guy,” Simpson said, “but I could have been a better Christian. And my commitment was to become a better Christian.”
• Simpson also seemed to talk his way into blind alleys, the most curious of which was his contention that “I believe I’ve led a conflict-free life.” That’s at sharp odds with accounts reported throughout the 1995 trial, as well as the robbery itself.
• Alcohol was apparently a factor in the initial crime, and Simpson said in his 2013 hearing that he would seek treatment for alcohol. But on Thursday, Simpson said he’d never enrolled in Alcoholics Anonymous or a similar program, indicating he did not believe he had a substance-abuse issue. He reiterated his belief that his work in nonviolent conflict resolution was the most important change he could have undergone.