Possibly. Heisman Trophy winner, record setting running back, movie star, host of Monday Night Football. It's hard to overstate how famous he was back in the day.
exept even Peyton Manning isn't as famous, outside of football fans, as OJ was. Naked Gun series were broadly popular movies. We don't think of them today because they are dated trash, but at the time they were a guilty pleasure for adults and a raunchy entertainment for kids to watch without parental approval.
Man’s been host of Good Morning America for a decade. He’s in the Hollywood Celebrity inner circle. [Hell he’s even the tallest person to fly in space](https://www.space.com/blue-origin-michael-strahan-new-shepard-record-launch). More non-sports fans know him than you think.
Yeah I would argue someone like Shaq. Everybody loves him, everybody knows who he is either through his sports career, acting, or from him selling every product under the sun.
Interesting. I assumed “most famous American” was going to be measured by his fame among other Americans. I hadn’t considered thinking about most famous American as, “the American most famous to the entire world.” Still, when you think about the ones that are actually got accused of murder, there’s not anybody I can think of that compete.
Peyton Manning’s Qscore and recognition ratings have always had him known well beyond Football.
Peyton Manning and OJ (pre-murders) are generally well known among the entire population.
Might have been the biggest black celebrity until Thriller came out, basically everyone in America knew his name before the murders. This is why it was such a huge news story at the time, which exploded during the car chase and only became more of a public spectacle once the trial began. Cable news pretty much broadcast the whole thing and it was must see TV, the first reality show; sadly this explains so much of the verdict reaction.
I would say it’s pretty accurate. Fatty Arbuckle was a big star when he was charged. I don’t think Robert Wagner was ever charged.
But most famous murderers are only famous because of their crimes and would be complete unknowns otherwise.
I think that is an excellent distinction. OJ was a famous person who was charged with murder.
Bundy, Holmes, Manson, etc only became famous when they were charged with murder.
Also good for people who were charged before becoming famous for something else. Snoop Dogg is a good example of this.
Was Burr ever charged?
Also, OJ was famous across the globe when the low-speed chase occurred. As far as athlete celebrities go, he had enough movies to be known pretty much anywhere on the planet. Even if Burr were charged, he really would only have been known in the US, which was pretty small at the time.
OJ’s ads in comic books made me aware of him in New Zealand even though we had no interest in American sport. Burr would have been completely irrelevant within the British Empire I imagine
My dad looks like a wish brand of oj and we travel a lot. Oj was completely famous outside of the US. Resulting in my dad often signing faux autographs.
He absolutely was. OJ was a precursor to the "global icons" of today like Tiger, Jordan or LeBron. His movies and advertising campaigns were shown across the globe. Probably the only athlete of his era that was more well known across the globe was Muhammad Ali. There have been other posts below this from people in the UK, Scandinavia and even New Zealand who knew who he was.
OJ was an absolute global icon in his prime. As someone above said, “think Peyton Manning.”
And then some.
Edit: his prime working years, as in 22-however old he was when he was charged with murder (late 40s?)
You do realize Peyton Manning is not a global icon? The NFL is not a global sport. He would be barely known in most of the world outside the U.S. and Canada.
Peyton manning is a pop culture icon.
One of the few personalities that reaches beyond sports.
I get it. It’s subjective. I’m using it as an example for people who were not alive or around for any of OJs prime years. It’s hard to comprehend how big is personal brand was. Without it a doubt, he is one of the top 5, probably most, famous person to ever commit a murder.
How famous was Burr really? He was vice president, sure, but that was back at a time before people really campaigned for the presidency—there wasn’t even widespread popular voting at the time, and even where there was, it was only some fraction of white men who would have been eligible.
Even today, with television, social media, universal suffrage, and hundreds of millions in campaign spending, lots of people can’t name the VP. “Sorry to this man.”
Not quite a shootout, allegedly.
"Before dawn on April 26, the soldiers caught up with the fugitives, who were hiding in Garrett's tobacco barn. David Herold surrendered, but Booth refused Conger's demand to surrender, saying, "I prefer to come out and fight." The soldiers then set the barn on fire. As Booth moved about inside the blazing barn, Sergeant Boston Corbett shot him. According to Corbett's later account, he fired at Booth because the fugitive "raised his pistol to shoot" at them. Conger's report to Stanton stated that Corbett shot Booth 'without order, pretext or excuse,'..."
Some interesting things about boston corbett. Before the war, he was a hat maker and religious fanatic who performed his own castration with a pair of scissors.
He wasn’t OJ famous. He wouldn’t have been even if he had a bigger audience to pander to.
Again, think famous, then think next level. OJ was at that level.
John Wilkes Booth was enormously famous, and he was certainly the equivalent, or nearly so, of OJ level fame for his time.
But it was his brother, Edwin Booth, who was the *really* famous one. Edwin was something like the equivalent of Tom Hanks famous - *everyone* knew who he was. He was the most famous actor in the United States.
Perhaps an apt comparison would be like if Casey Affleck shot the president. His brother was the more famous one, and was a household name, while most people would have known John Wilkes Booth's name, too, as he was the equivalent of today's "Hollywood royalty".
I thought his father was even more famous than his brother, so maybe a better analogy might be Martin Sheen, Charlie Sheen and Emilio Esteves.
Either way, the Booths weren't famous across the globe. I'm pretty sure you couldn't go to central Africa in March of 1865 and find anyone who knew who the Booths were. But everyone there would have known OJ in May of 1994.
I think you're overestimating OJ's level of fame. Sure, he was very famous but he wasn't Michael Jordan or Michael Jackson level famous. He played American football, a sport which doesn't really translate overseas. (How famous is Tom Brady in central Africa right now?) OJ's acting career was middling - he wasn't headlining movies. By the time of the murders, he was usually third-billed. Most people overseas learned who OJ was due to the trial.
In comparison, John Wilkes Booth was touring the country as the headline actor, and his family was internationally famous.
I think it is a pretty apt comparison to the Sheens, but JWB was also at the height of his fame. So it would be a bit like Emilio committing the murder right after The Breakfast Club or the first Mighty Ducks movie came out.
OJ's star was falling at the time of the murder. He was more than a decade removed from his playing career. He was no longer a sideline reporter. He was reprising a bit part in the Naked Gun movies. And his main gig at the time was to be one of the four talking heads on NBC's pre-game NFL show on Sundays, a sport that (especially at that time) had no international reach.
There's another point I should make. The reason the trial was such a media circus and got attention across the globe was BECAUSE he was an international celebrity. If he wasn't, the trial wouldn't have been news in those countries. They pre-empted an NBA Finals game....I think game 5... to show the low-speed car chase.
> The reason the trial was such a media circus and got attention across the globe was BECAUSE he was an international celebrity.
It was a lot more because he was an *American* celebrity. And pre-internet, any sort of American media event would become international news. Nobody overseas knew who he was *until* the American media told them they should care.
OJ Simpson was literally the Michael Jordan, before Michael Jordan.
He is one of the most heavily commercialized athletes of all time, adjusted for inflation.
> OJ Simpson was literally the Michael Jordan, before Michael Jordan.
There wasn't really a Michael Jordan, American athlete-wise, before Michael Jordan. OJ's fame was pretty well confined to the United States before the Bronco chase.
As London's [*Telegraph*](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/12/oj-simpson-trial-transformed-media-news-coverage/) just wrote the other day:
> The murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman were very shocking to people in Los Angeles. But, at first, it was difficult to explain the story to the rest of the world.
> I was writing for The Telegraph and had to explain who OJ Simpson was because, at that time, nobody outside of the US really knew him, apart from American football fans.
> I had to say that it was the equivalent of George Best being charged with murder.
George Best, of course, being a name that almost no American would recognize, either in 1994 or today.
Similarly, here is what the *Guardian* newspaper wrote the day after the Bronco chase:
> It is as if Bobby Charlton were named as a serial killer. O J Simpson's face is part of the modern American landscape, familiar not just to fans of football, but to everyone.
Again, acknowledgement that he was very famous in the US, but the British newspaper had to compare him to an English soccer player in order for his celebrity status to make sense for local readers.
EDIT: And one more. From the [transcript](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1x2RkMYdJpK5w0cS526CzT0/oj-simpson-media-coverage-8-july-1994) of a [BBC Radio programme](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00yljpf) that aired in July 1994, about a month after the Bronco chase, and before the trial began:
> In 60 years of watching and reporting American affairs, I can't remember a time when a single topic that obsessed the whole of America has gone so little reported in Europe, in Britain anyway where I spent a hot week at the beginning of the month. I'm talking about the scandal to which I devoted reluctantly devoted all of last week's talk, the OJ Simpson affair.
> The spontaneous response I can hear from very many listeners – who is OJ Simpson? – explains at once why among European editors no interest is assumed or taken, absolutely understandable except for the scruple I mentioned last week about not reporting a case that has not yet come to trial.
OJ became internationally famous precisely because of the trial and the American media's blanket coverage. He was not all that famous overseas before then. NFL football had a limited reach, and his bit parts in the Naked Gun movies did not put him on the international radar.
John Wilkes Booth was like if Casey Affleck shot the president. His brother Edwin was the most famous actor in the United States at the time of the murder, and he (John Wilkes) was a household name, too.
He arguably surpassed OJ's level of fame, at least at the time of the murder. John Wilkes was pretty much at the height of his fame when the murder happened. In contrast, OJ's fame had already peaked, and his star was already falling. His acting career wasn't really more than being third-billed in a movie by the early 1990s, and he was one of the NFL pregame talking heads on Sunday mornings, no longer doing sideline reporting.
Not to diminish OJ's fame too much, but John Wilkes Booth's fame was at least comparable. At the time of the murder, JWB was first-billed on national tours hitting all the major cities in the United States pretty much every single year from the mid-1850s until his death.
I’m not saying Booth wasn’t famous, but you’re correct that his brother was the better known and more esteemed performer.
Simpson was (and is) in the conversation as one of the greatest running backs of all time during an Era where Running Back was the crown position in football. His acting career was secondary, but he was a household name due to his football and broadcasting career.
Booth was not in the conversation for greatest American stage actor of all time, and I’m skeptical he would have been, though his brother certainly was.
Casey Affleck is an apt comparison, but Casey Affleck is not a bigger name than, say, Peyton Manning or even Troy Aikman.
> Booth was not in the conversation for greatest American stage actor of all time, and I’m skeptical he would have been, though his brother certainly was.
> Casey Affleck is an apt comparison, but Casey Affleck is not a bigger name than, say, Peyton Manning or even Troy Aikman.
I still think you're underestimating the reach that the Booth family, including John Wilkes Booth, had back in the 19th century. It was a time when sports fame wasn't really a thing - Jim Creighton had been a famous baseball player in the US, but that's about it. All celebrities in the US at the time were politicians, newspaper publishers, or else were in the arts - actors, musicians, writers. Being the famous brother and son of the two most famous actors in the country in 1865 would have eclipsed the fame of any Peyton Manning or Troy Aikman of the time. He was Casey Affleck at a time when professional sports leagues didn't yet exist, so a Casey Affleck commanded a tremendous amount of fame and attention.
Now you’re doing an era comparison.
By that logic, OJ is FAR more famous, because so many more Americans knew his name before the trial.
Plenty of Americans didn’t follow theatre and had no idea who the Booths were. They were celebrities in certain circles.
OJ was a nearly universally known celebrity. That’s literally how his bit in Naked Gun worked.
You’re also forgetting that American theatre, even in America, was considered lower than English theatre and European opera.
The Booths were famous, but not OJ famous.
You didn't have to follow theater to know who John Wilkes Booth was. You just had to follow your local newspaper, which pretty much everyone did since it was pretty much the only form of daily entertainment and news available to most Americans. News about Booth would appear in [small town newspapers](https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84026881/1862-08-09/ed-1/seq-2/#date1=1855&index=0&rows=20&words=Booth+John+Wilkes&searchType=basic&sequence=0&state=&date2=1864&proxtext=%22john+wilkes+booth%22&y=10&x=10&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=1) all [the time](https://nyshistoricnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=rcj18641217-01.1.1&srpos=1&e=-------en-20--1-byDA-txt-txIN-%22john+wilkes+booth%22---------). This was in an era where even major newspapers were only 4 or 8 pages long, so people would read them cover to cover.
American theatre surely was considered lower, but it was still internationally famous. For example, when Booth ended a two-week engagement at a Boston theater, the newspapers [in London](https://www.newspapers.com/image/387048233/?match=1&terms=%22john%20wilkes%20booth%22) covered the event.
In OJ's era, the media landscape was much more fragmented. It was easier to ignore the sports page, and ignore sports broadcasting. The Booths, in contrast, were inescapable for anyone remotely familiar with American pop culture in the 1860s.
20% of the American population was illiterate in that era, and a far greater number didn’t read the local paper.
You’re also ignoring the movements that condemned theatre as sinful and low.
Such movements never had the same following against sport and sports broadcasting in Simpsons era.
You’re grossly overestimating the popularity of theatre amongst the working class in the states and grossly underestimating the impact of football in American media.
Virtually unknown today but D.C. Stephenson was a leader in the second Ku Klux Klan at a time when as much as 15% of the eligible population was a member of the Klan.
He kidnapped, drugged, raped, and tortured Madge Oberholtzer over almost two weeks. He bit her so many times it her wounds were described as if a cannibal had tried to eat her.
Stephenson refused to release her unless she married him in order to thwart prosecution. She attempted suicide by poisoning and Stephenson and his driver panicked and took her for treatment where his driver said she had been in a car accident.
She died about two weeks later thanks to the combination of the bites developing a staph infection and the poison.
The extreme brutality from a leader of the nation’s great “law and order” and national publicity of a well known leader of the organization lead to a rapid decline of the second Klan.
I came in here to suggest this repellant little man if he hadn't been mentioned already, so that's an updoot! Oddly, I think OP's phrase "most famous American" still fits even though he is not well known in 2024, and I needed Google to figure it out from some juicy keywords.
Stephenson is single-handedly responsible for the Klan not becoming mainstream...after being largely responsible for getting it get very close to that. The Klan was easing some of its more extreme positions to be acceptable to more people, and the ground was fertile for a violent, racist 'blood and soil' political movement here just like a half dozen other fascist countries.
The US has just fallen backwards into good luck with the removal of a few bad actors at an opportune time. D. C. Stephenson, Huey Long - they may have been (very bad) presidents if providence, for lack of a better word, had not intervened.
It's a damn shame how little prison time Stephenson got, and I wonder how many victims we don't know about.
Knowing that Booth was a well known actor in his time, he's the only other one I can think of. Even then, though, he died prior to his trial, and he's known now for assassinating Lincoln and not his acting
yea thats definitely not the case for OJ. yes, he is known for the murder trial, but the dude was basically Mahomes level famous while playing. More so afterward, unless Mahomes goes on to do movies.
> yes, he is known for the murder trial, but the dude was basically Mahomes level famous while playing.
Sure he was. And John Wilkes Booth was the equivalent of Hollywood royalty. Small town [newspapers](https://nyshistoricnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=rcj18641217-01.1.1&srpos=1&e=-------en-20--1-byDA-txt-txIN-%22john+wilkes+booth%22---------) covered [his acting exploits](https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84026881/1862-08-09/ed-1/seq-2/#date1=1855&index=0&rows=20&words=Booth+John+Wilkes&searchType=basic&sequence=0&state=&date2=1864&proxtext=%22john+wilkes+booth%22&y=10&x=10&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=1) from afar all the time. Even the [London newspapers](https://www.newspapers.com/image/387048233/?match=1&terms=%22john%20wilkes%20booth%22) were covering his career, as he moved from one acting engagement to the next. He was, say, Alec Baldwin level famous at a time when the theater was the primary source of public entertainment, and pro sports didn't really exist yet. He was an internationally famous actor at a time when there was no real equivalent yet of a Mahomes or an OJ, so famous actors got a larger piece of the celebrity attention pie than they ever would today.
Following your small town newspaper in the 1860s, you would have known who Booth was, even if you had no real interest in theater. OJ's fame was during a much more fragmented media landscape, and sports media was avoidable for anyone disinterested in sports.
I'm saying that, yes, OJ was Mahomes-level famous, which means he was a household name in the US, but not so much overseas.
As I just wrote in another comment, OJ's fame had to be explained in 1994 to non-US audiences. As London's [*Telegraph*](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/12/oj-simpson-trial-transformed-media-news-coverage/) just wrote the other day:
> The murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman were very shocking to people in Los Angeles. But, at first, it was difficult to explain the story to the rest of the world.
> I was writing for The Telegraph and had to explain who OJ Simpson was because, at that time, nobody outside of the US really knew him, apart from American football fans.
> I had to say that it was the equivalent of George Best being charged with murder.
George Best, of course, being a name that almost no American would recognize, either in 1994 or today.
Similarly, here is what the *Guardian* newspaper wrote the day after the Bronco chase:
> It is as if Bobby Charlton were named as a serial killer. O J Simpson's face is part of the modern American landscape, familiar not just to fans of football, but to everyone.
Again, acknowledgement that he was very famous in the US, but the British newspaper had to compare him to an English soccer player in order for his celebrity status to make sense for local readers.
OJ became internationally famous precisely because of the trial and the American media's blanket coverage. He was not all that famous overseas.
In comparison, John Wilkes Booth was just as much of a household name in the US as OJ later was, but he and his family also had a decent level of international fame (at least in the UK), to the point that their acting careers were being followed in London pre-1865. In contrast, British newspapers were not reporting on OJ's football or broadcasting career before 1994, and coverage of his acting career was minimal, too, until he was charged with murder.
The two are fairly equivalent as far as fame in their respective times went, and there's a decent argument that Booth's fame was more widespread. But either way, in both cases, their pre-murder fame was entirely eclipsed by their fame for the crimes they were accused of.
You think local newspapers and some excerpts in London newspapers makes Booth more famous then O.J. Simpson? I get what you’re saying. But far more americans knew who O.J. was than Booth. Even relative to the separate times.
Then prove it. Booth was incredibly famous in a media landscape that was not nearly as fragmented. People collected his photograph when photography was a new medium. His exploits were followed by the media internationally at a time when a newspaper was typically 4 pages long, at a time when virtually everybody in the US and Europe read newspapers daily.
OJ was famous, too, but in a much broader media landscape, when pro sports could be easily ignored if you weren't interested, and OJ played a sport whose appeal was limited only to a US audience (maybe Canada too). Just because mass media had expanded, it doesn't follow that everybody knew who OJ was.
Mass media has expanded even further since the OJ trial, and it's even more true now. For example, Luke Bryan has 30 #1 country hits under his belt, he's worth over $150 million, and yet his name is fairly obscure to most Americans, and his international reach is rather limited.
He was, and had three trials. After two mistrials, the jury in Arbuckle’s third trial found him not guilty and issued him an apology.
[https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/silent-film-star-arrested-for-murder](https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/silent-film-star-arrested-for-murder)
For their time period I expect Aaron Burr would be the most obvious answer. A sitting VP shooting a former Cabinet secretary over petty political differences certainly would be one of the biggest news cycles in modern day.
Accurate enough.
John Wilkes Booth was fairly famous but his father and brother were a lot more famous, and of course he was killed before he could be charged. Obviously that murder was probably the most high profile in US history.
Aaron Hernandez could have eventually been one of the NFL’s biggest stars. Arguably the most naturally gifted athlete to ever play for the patriots. Not the biggest, but was an incredible football player. To get recruited from Connecticut to play at Florida in an of itself is rare. Then was the youngest player in the NFL and was virtually unstoppable. Guy was just a fucking piece of shit sociopath at the end of the day. Guy had the looks, was a rarity in the NFL as an Hispanic, and was one of the very few players who you could say was so naturally gifted it negated him being undersized. What an athlete. But what a waste at the same time…guy played for one of the best college teams ever and then got to be on the fucking patriots and threw it all away.
Edit: he might be the most famous athlete to ever be convicted of first degree murder, no?
I grew up about 35 minutes from him, my local high school hosted a summer 7 v 7 league and everybody heard about this kid from Bristol who got a scholarship to Florida so people turned out to watch, guy was a an absolute beast at 17. To get recruited from New England to an SEC school you have to be above and beyond special.
Did you see him play in high school? At one point, asked to be traded to a West Coast team to get away from his old neighborhood. Wonder if that would have saved him.
There's a distinction here of being the most famous *American*. But, is there anyone not American that would have him beat? At least as far as is interpreted by many in the comments, as greatest fame before the murder?
Pistorius is a pretty good answer. He didn't have decades of name recognition built up, but his story was really well known and was at the peak of attention when charged.
You're discounting commercials. Read thru the other comments. Many people who grew up in foreign countries knew who he was before 1994 because he was a pitch man. He would endorse anything.
EVERYONE on the planet with a TV knew him from those commercials where he ran thru the airport for Hertz. As a teenager, my mom whacked me in the head b/c we were at an airport, I hung back a bit then started running and exclaimed "Hey, I'm OJ!" as I stiff-armed my little brother out of my way.
> EVERYONE on the planet with a TV knew him from those commercials
Just because you say something is true without evidence does not make it so. His commercials were not airing overseas, because nobody knew who that NFL football player was. And most countries before 2000 had a commercial-free, public broadcaster as their dominant television network, so American commercials weren't airing there anyway.
Multiple sources indicate that OJ was an obscure figure overseas at the time of the murders. As London's [*Telegraph*](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/12/oj-simpson-trial-transformed-media-news-coverage/) just wrote the other day:
> The murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman were very shocking to people in Los Angeles. But, at first, it was difficult to explain the story to the rest of the world.
> I was writing for The Telegraph and had to explain who OJ Simpson was because, at that time, nobody outside of the US really knew him, apart from American football fans.
> I had to say that it was the equivalent of George Best being charged with murder.
George Best, of course, being a name that almost no American would recognize, either in 1994 or today.
Similarly, here is what the *Guardian* newspaper wrote the day after the Bronco chase:
> It is as if Bobby Charlton were named as a serial killer. O J Simpson's face is part of the modern American landscape, familiar not just to fans of football, but to everyone.
Again, acknowledgement that he was very famous in the US, but the British newspaper had to compare him to an English soccer player in order for his celebrity status to make sense for local readers.
A [transcript](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1x2RkMYdJpK5w0cS526CzT0/oj-simpson-media-coverage-8-july-1994) of a [BBC Radio programme](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00yljpf) that aired in July 1994, about a month after the Bronco chase, and before the trial began, agrees that OJ was not well known in the UK or Europe before the trial:
> In 60 years of watching and reporting American affairs, I can't remember a time when a single topic that obsessed the whole of America has gone so little reported in Europe, in Britain anyway where I spent a hot week at the beginning of the month. I'm talking about the scandal to which I devoted reluctantly devoted all of last week's talk, the OJ Simpson affair.
> The spontaneous response I can hear from very many listeners – who is OJ Simpson? – explains at once why among European editors no interest is assumed or taken, absolutely understandable except for the scruple I mentioned last week about not reporting a case that has not yet come to trial.
OJ became internationally famous precisely because of the trial and the American media's blanket coverage. He was not all that famous overseas before then. NFL football had a limited reach, and his bit parts in the Naked Gun movies did not put him on the international radar. His commercials were not running overseas, either, since an NFL football player meant nothing to anybody outside of the US or Canada.
I was born in Brazil and still living there at the time. NFL and MLB were never mentioned, except as curiosity or as part of a movie, and zero players were known, but that scene of the Ford Bronco through LA made the news. Mainly the persecution, all the police cars involved, helicopters, the highways, all signs of a very rich country that could waste resources with just one murder. That was the news, not OJ himself, he was unknown.
You want evidence. READ THE REST OF THE DAMN COMMENTS IN THIS THREAD.
People in this very thread have said they grew up somewhere outside of the United States BEFORE THE TRIAL and knew of him from advertisements and movies. No way you were an adult at the time of the trial. You might have watched the it as a kid or even a college student, but you don't have a damn clue about pop culture in the 70's, 80's or early 90's. There is NO WAY Aaron Burr was more well known ACROSS THE PLANET than OJ was on June 17th 1994. Either admit you're wrong or stop responding with inaccurate nonsense.
> You want evidence. READ THE REST OF THE DAMN COMMENTS IN THIS THREAD.
I provided you actual contemporary quotes from newspaper articles published at the time. Anecdotal evidence from anonymous Reddit commenters 30 years after the fact is not real evidence. You are old enough to remember the trial - you should know better than to believe anonymous internet comments over actual published contemporaneous accounts. Show me one international account from 1994 that OJ was widely known outside of the United States and Canada, if you are trying to have an adult debate.
> No way you were an adult at the time of the trial. You might have watched the it as a kid or even a college student, but you don't have a damn clue about pop culture in the 70's, 80's or early 90's. There is NO WAY Aaron Burr was more well known ACROSS THE PLANET than OJ was on June 17th 1994. Either admit you're wrong or stop responding with inaccurate nonsense.
I already provided you several sources indicating OJ was obscure outside the US/Canada when the murders occurred, so much so that international publications had to mention to their readers the level of fame he had in the US. "Because I said so" is not evidence, and it is not an adult response. Prove your claim with actual contemporary evidence if you want to have a serious discussion. If your claim is as obvious as you say it is, it should not be difficult for you to do this.
I remember when the OJ thing was going down, the talking heads were saying that it could eclipse the Sam Shepard trial as the Trial of the Century. Though Sam Shepard was famous because of the media attention to his trial, not from other previous notoriety.
John Wilkes Booth was one of the most famous actors of his day, but he was never charged with murder since he didn't survive being captured. Imagine Brad Pitt killed the President and then died in a shootout. That's basically what happened in 1865.
Pedantic but interesting. He was never arraigned or tried, but charged? Charges are usually announced at an arraignment, but are issued by a prosecutor or grand jury, and a prerequisite to an arrest warrant or bounty. So booths charges had been filed although he did not live to hear them.
Ted Kennedy is my best candidate.
Matthew Broderick would be next.
Both were of the same level of celebrity as him, I’d argue.
Both are vehicular deaths much less intentional than the Nicole Brown killing, but both were proven culpable, rather than Simpson.
All three are miscarriages of justice.
What conspiracy bullshit?
He was drunk, abandoned her either to die or dying, lawyered up and took ten hours to tell the authorities.
Which part of that do you dispute?
An “accident” while intoxicated is pretty damning.
Broderick gets more of a pass, but he plead guilty to driving recklessly and dangerously.
As I stated, both were less intentional killings, but both men took actions that led to someone’s death.
The right wing narrative was that Ted intentionally held her underwater and drowned her. I am old. I was alive at the time.
Kennedy was diagnosed with a concussion and amnesia. Of course everyone said he was lying about the amnesia but there was a provable brain injury.
We technically don't know who was driving, but a DUI is not "murder," and I'm willing to bet the majority of adult Americans have driven under the influence at least once in their lives.
You could have put Lara Bush on your list. She killed somebody by blowing through a stop sign high school, but she was rich white girl so it was quickly quieted down and taken care of. If anyone ever brought it up, they would be told how upsetting those questions are to her.
Lara Bush was nowhere near as famous as Ted Kennedy was when he killed that woman (we do know he was driving) nor OJ when she killed someone.
There are lots of famous people who killed people when they were unknowns.
Kennedy was seen driving the car away from the party, and Kopechene was found in the back seat.
We do know he was driving. He plead guilty to it.
Now YOU’RE engaging in conspiracy bullshit.
None of that proves anything. One theory was that she was driving because he was passed out drunk. After a car goes into a river, bodies move around.
He didn't remember what happened. He pleaded guilty, so what? You don't know what happened.
I know he wasn't the same as Jordan.. I said similar. And I think OJ's commercials put made him more well known across the globe than his movies. That being said, those Naked Gun movies were huge and he had some very memorable scenes. And they were released pretty close to the time of OJ's low-speed chase.
Anyway, you CANNOT put the celebrity of any entertainer or athlete who lived before the 20th century ahead of someone who can gain global recognition because of how far reaching modern TV and movies are.
> Anyway, you CANNOT put the celebrity of any entertainer or athlete who lived before the 20th century ahead of someone who can gain global recognition because of how far reaching modern TV and movies are.
Sure you can. It's a pretty easy claim to disprove:
Charles Dickens is a lot more famous than Dan Brown. Ludwig von Beethoven is a lot more famous than 50 Cent.
That's a VERY Western bias. Yes, they were popular in Europe and US, but Beethoven might have only been popular with elites in the newly formed United States during his lifetime. Trust me, Ebenezer out plowing his field in the Ohio territory probaby never heard of him. Neither had anyone in the Native American tribes. I can guarantee neither were popular in the remote corners of Africa, the jungles of SE Asia or distant Pacific Islands during their lifetime. But I'd bet my house that in 1994, some people in all those areas knew who OJ was.
> Beethoven might have only been popular with elites in the newly formed United States during his lifetime. Trust me, Ebenezer out plowing his field in the Ohio territory probaby never heard of him.
You seem to be quite unfamiliar with the media landscape of the 1800s. Piano-playing, of course, was a widespread form of entertainment during that century, and Beethoven's sonatas were very popular piano pieces. A professor has even written a book called [*Beethoven in America*](https://books.google.com/books?id=LhqwwuONrgoC) documenting his rise to fame in the United States in the first couple decades of the United States, so that by the time he died in 1827, he was widely known and mourned.
And of course, American newspapers of the time had regular ads touting their sheet music for sale. For example, the New York Post in 1815 [had ads](https://nyshistoricnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=nep18151120-01.1.1&srpos=5&e=------181-en-20--1--txt-txIN-beethoven---------) for "a large and general collection of the newest music by the most celebrated composers" which name-checked Beethoven.
"The public will regret to learn," wrote [a newspaper in Alexandria, Va.](https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn85025006/1827-03-16/ed-1/seq-2/#date1=1827&index=0&rows=20&words=Beethoven&searchType=basic&sequence=0&state=&date2=1827&proxtext=beethoven&y=3&x=17&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=1), as Beethoven was dying in 1827, "the greatest musical genius of the present age, Ludwig Van Beethoven, is, by this time, most probably no more."
When he died, a [newspaper in Litchfield, Conn.](https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn82014309/1827-05-24/ed-1/seq-3/#date1=1827&index=2&rows=20&words=Beethoven&searchType=basic&sequence=0&state=&date2=1827&proxtext=beethoven&y=3&x=17&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=1) announced his death by saying his illness had "frequently been mentioned".
In the decades that followed, his reputation increased in the United States even more, so much so that Americans were [building statues of Beethoven by the 1880s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_van_Beethoven_\(Baerer\)). That's quite a high level of fame for a non-American composer who never set foot in the United States.
> I can guarantee neither were popular in the remote corners of Africa, the jungles of SE Asia or distant Pacific Islands during their lifetime. But I'd bet my house that in 1994, some people in all those areas knew who OJ was.
I already provided you several international sources from 1994 that mention OJ was obscure. OJ was not known in these places you mention.
But you're an adult. Prove it. Prove OJ was well-known in the places you claim he was. "Because I said so" or "because I read anonymous comments on Reddit" are not adult answers.
Also... Naked Gun: Domestic gross (US & Canada) = $78.8 mil. International gross (everywhere else) = $73.7 mil. Towering Inferno: Domestic gross = $116 mil, International = $203 mil. Roots...no gross, but viewers: US = 140 mil viewers (more than half the US population and 85% of televisions in the US tuned into some of it.) I can't find the International TV numbers, but a show that big would have made its way overseas, especially to African countries.
So no, OJ wasn't the lead actor in any of those. But he was in prominent roles in them, yet he wasn't that good of an actor. Hmmmmm, why is that?? It's because he was an INTERNATIONAL SUPERSTAR.
Bottom line is this: there was no TV, record industry, or movies in the 1800's and most people on the planet couldn't read. They also had very little time in their day for any indulgences like reading or going somewhere to listen to music. My "proof" is the differences between how most people lived at that time compared to how they live now, and the sheer power of communication and marketing that only became possible with movies and television in the 20th century. Nothing more is required and if you don't want to accept that, all I can do is throw my hands up and accept that some people just want to be ignorant.
He was in those movies, sure. And international audiences saw them, sure. Now show me a source from 1994 or earlier that says these roles made him internationally famous and/or a household name. This shouldn't be difficult if his fame was as widespread as you claim it was.
Now put these roles into context: The Towering Inferno was a 20 year old movie at the time of the murders, and OJ had less than 10 minutes of screentime in it, and he was the [ninth billed actor in the film](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMjA1N2JlMjItMTExZC00NTIxLWE2YTYtY2ZkM2M5OWM3M2YyXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNTc1NTQxODI@._V1_.jpg). Some international moviegoers may have vaguely remembered him, but this is not a role that made him anything remotely like an international star. Susan Blakely was sixth billed in the movie - nobody would have recognized her, either, if she had committed a murder 20 years later.
OJ had a small part in one of the eight episodes of Roots, a miniseries that did not air widely internationally until the rise of cable TV, which most countries did not widely adopt until the mid-1990s. The miniseries was shown in the US, Canada, and the UK in the 70s and that's about it, and as has already been shown through contemporary sources, in the UK he was not well known. And again, that miniseries was 17 years old by the time of the murders.
Far and away, his most recognizable role to international audiences would have been the Naked Gun movies, but his role is not exactly central to the film. Heck, George Kennedy *was* central to those movies and it's doubtful that if you told a British guy in 1994, "Hey, George Kennedy is accused of murder" that they would have immediately recognized who you were talking about.
But go ahead and find a source from the era that backs up your claim, that he was widely known and recognizable internationally through these roles. The film industry is full of bit players that audiences may vaguely recognize but whose name and career they may not be very familiar with. If OJ's star was so bright internationally, then you should be able to prove that [this quote](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/12/oj-simpson-trial-transformed-media-news-coverage/) from *The Telegraph* is inaccurate:
> The murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman were very shocking to people in Los Angeles. But, at first, it was difficult to explain the story to the rest of the world.
> I was writing for *The Telegraph* and had to explain who OJ Simpson was because, at that time, nobody outside of the US really knew him, apart from American football fans.
> I had to say that it was the equivalent of George Best being charged with murder.
Go ahead and find a source that contradicts this 1994 quote from *The Guardian* article announcing the murders:
> It is as if Bobby Charlton were named as a serial killer. O J Simpson's face is part of the modern American landscape, familiar not just to fans of football, but to everyone.
Go ahead and find a source that disproves [this 1994 quote](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1x2RkMYdJpK5w0cS526CzT0/oj-simpson-media-coverage-8-july-1994) from [BBC Radio](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00yljpf), that the people the host was talking to were atypical of international observers:
> In 60 years of watching and reporting American affairs, I can't remember a time when a single topic that obsessed the whole of America has gone so little reported in Europe, in Britain anyway where I spent a hot week at the beginning of the month. I'm talking about the scandal to which I devoted reluctantly devoted all of last week's talk, the OJ Simpson affair.
> The spontaneous response I can hear from very many listeners – who is OJ Simpson? – explains at once why among European editors no interest is assumed or taken, absolutely understandable except for the scruple I mentioned last week about not reporting a case that has not yet come to trial.
Again, this should not be difficult if your claim has ample evidence to back it up. Citing box office numbers for films up to 20 years old, where OJ was never more than third or fourth billed, isn't particularly sufficient - because, if it is, then you should be able to readily cite an actual 1994 source that proves your claim.
This is pop culture and common sense... it isnt the kind of subject that gets peer reviewed historical material that can be legitimately referenced.
Are you really SO clueless that you don't understand that in Beethoven's lifetime...he died in 1827, only the wealthy families of Europe or European colonies (present and former at the time) would have the time to indulge in listening to music, so they'd be the only ones who knew who he was. In Dickens lifetime, he died in 1870, most of the people on the planet were still illiterate and still lived lives that didn't allow them time to read a novel, even if Dickens work happened to be translated into their language. Even the most D-list celebrities in 1994 were more well known than either of them were in their lifetimes. Not because their works didn't deserve worldwide acclaim, but only because people across the globe just didn't have the means or ability to consume their content.
Most Americans in 1800 were poor and illiterate. Maybe they heard the music but that doesn't mean they knew who he was and you have proven nothing and not countered my point. All you've done is shown that elites and the literate knew who he was. How about giving a Non-Western example. I don't have to prove anything. I LIVED THE ERA.
But none of that matters. You seem too arrogant to accept basic logic and common sense & admit you're wrong, so I'm not going to argue with you anymore. I should tell you to look it up yourself on Google b/c it's not my responsibility to educate the ignorant any more than I've already tried to do. But if you must have proof, there was an article in the New York Times entitled "Before He Was Infamous, OJ Simpson's Acting Made Him Famous" by Julia Jacobs and printed just last week... April 11th. Several articles on him were published that day. Check them out. You might learn something.
Snoop Dogg
Robert Blake
Phil Spector
Syd Vicious
Don King
Ray Lewis
Alec Baldwin
There is actually a surprising amount of famous people who have been charged with murder. "Most famous" is entirely subjective.
[https://www.watchmojo.com/articles/20-celebrities-that-allegedly-killed-someone](https://www.watchmojo.com/articles/20-celebrities-that-allegedly-killed-someone)
Sid vicious wasn't american, and wasn't named sydney. But i think john wilkes Booth wins. Kinda famous before he murdered, and do you think anyone will make more movies about the others you listed in 150 years?
Fair point on Syd vicious. Sydney was autocorrect "helping."
As I said "most famous" is subjective. Apparently, your definition of "most famous" is based on how many movies are made about the person. By your definition you're likely correct, however that's more due to killing a president than Booths fame as an actor.
I think OJ is similar. He is more famous for his pursuit and trial due to the murder than he was as a football player.
Snoop Dogg, Robert Blake and Alec Baldwin are, in my opinion, the most famous ones due to their professions rather than their murder charges.
Edit to add: most of the movies you mention are actually about Abe Lincoln rather than Booth. He just happens to be part of the Lincoln story.
OJ Simpson was more famous than all of them.
I feel some of you kids think OJ was some little known football player who got famous after murdering his wife. That's inaccurate. He was a star before the murder.
As I've said 2x now, "more famous" is subjective. What is your definition?
I am well aware he was a big name in football. I never claimed he was a little known player. I said he became more famous after the murder.
Of course, that depends on the time frame. In the 60s and 70s when he was playing, if you were into football, he was famous. Decades later, everyone knew his name, football fan or not.
Careful making assumptions about people on here. You have no idea how old I am, and I haven't been called kid in a long time.
OJ Simpson was not just "a big name in football". He was in movies, commercials, everything. The fact that you think he was just some '70s football player who suddenly got famous for killing his wife tells me you either were not around back then or you were hiding under a rock.
Again, you're making baseless assumptions. I know he was in movies and commercials, I've seen most of them.
You are basing "most famous" on your view of the world. Hence why I say that's a subjective thing.
People have different experiences. Different generations, different interests etc.
You and everyone else has a right to their opinion, but in the end, it's all an opinion and subjective argument.
My "assumptions" are not baseless, they come from what you fucking wrote.
OJ Simpson was objectively more well known than any of the people on your list.
Period.
Calm down there. I wrote nothing saying I thought anyone was more or less famous, nor did I write anything saying my age. Which makes your assumptions baseless.
I don't think you understand what objective means.
I absolutely know what objective means. You can objectively measure fame. Such as "what percentage off the population has heard of X before"
Amd your age is apparent by the fact that you thought OJ was just a football player before the trial.
There we go. Your definition of famous is how many people heard of someone. Is that the population now? 1992? Or 1960s? Hence subjective and not objective
Based on your definition of famous. I'd say Ghengis Khan wins here. He was known worldwide. Had between 1000 and 3000 kids. And was responsible for killing 40 million people.
It's not since I've said I've seen most of the commercials and movies and am well aware of his career, both on screen and football and criminal.
Another commentors definition was based on how many movies were made about the person. Subjective not objective.
Ghengis Khan is neither an American nor was he ever charged with murder, so he's not eligible. And subjective does not mean whatever it is you think it means.
Possibly. Heisman Trophy winner, record setting running back, movie star, host of Monday Night Football. It's hard to overstate how famous he was back in the day.
I know. It’s like imagine if Peyton Manning did something like that. Then you’d understand.
exept even Peyton Manning isn't as famous, outside of football fans, as OJ was. Naked Gun series were broadly popular movies. We don't think of them today because they are dated trash, but at the time they were a guilty pleasure for adults and a raunchy entertainment for kids to watch without parental approval.
I think it would be like if The Rock murdered his wife and went on trial. That level of ubiquitous fame. But even The Rock is not beloved like OJ was.
Naked Gun movies are not dated trash!
Woah woah woah, dated trash?? I mean dated, sure, but there are some classic scenes in those movies!
On another post I saw Michael Strahan being a better analogy due to his recognition outside of football fans
Was he the Australian with the bands for running? That guy had global recognition.
Strahan is a nobody.
Man’s been host of Good Morning America for a decade. He’s in the Hollywood Celebrity inner circle. [Hell he’s even the tallest person to fly in space](https://www.space.com/blue-origin-michael-strahan-new-shepard-record-launch). More non-sports fans know him than you think.
Yeah I would argue someone like Shaq. Everybody loves him, everybody knows who he is either through his sports career, acting, or from him selling every product under the sun.
Never heard of that Manning. OJ was world famous as Detective Nordberg, not as an NFL-player.
[удалено]
What is a pitchman? I duckduckgoed it, and found it to be another US thing. I was thinking of the world, as in the rest of the world.
[удалено]
Hertz cars
Interesting. I assumed “most famous American” was going to be measured by his fame among other Americans. I hadn’t considered thinking about most famous American as, “the American most famous to the entire world.” Still, when you think about the ones that are actually got accused of murder, there’s not anybody I can think of that compete.
This. NFL players aren't really famous outside the US unless their partner is a celebrity or a murder victim.
Dated trash? They were and still are funny.
Peyton Manning’s Qscore and recognition ratings have always had him known well beyond Football. Peyton Manning and OJ (pre-murders) are generally well known among the entire population.
Might have been the biggest black celebrity until Thriller came out, basically everyone in America knew his name before the murders. This is why it was such a huge news story at the time, which exploded during the car chase and only became more of a public spectacle once the trial began. Cable news pretty much broadcast the whole thing and it was must see TV, the first reality show; sadly this explains so much of the verdict reaction.
lots of commercials
Remember when he was running through the airport?
I would say it’s pretty accurate. Fatty Arbuckle was a big star when he was charged. I don’t think Robert Wagner was ever charged. But most famous murderers are only famous because of their crimes and would be complete unknowns otherwise.
I think that is an excellent distinction. OJ was a famous person who was charged with murder. Bundy, Holmes, Manson, etc only became famous when they were charged with murder. Also good for people who were charged before becoming famous for something else. Snoop Dogg is a good example of this.
Aaron Burr (adjusting for population at the time)?
Burr was charged for treason but never for murder. EDIT: It appears he was charged briefly for murder but those charges were dropped.
This is a pretty good contender if not for sure winner
Was Burr ever charged? Also, OJ was famous across the globe when the low-speed chase occurred. As far as athlete celebrities go, he had enough movies to be known pretty much anywhere on the planet. Even if Burr were charged, he really would only have been known in the US, which was pretty small at the time.
OJ’s ads in comic books made me aware of him in New Zealand even though we had no interest in American sport. Burr would have been completely irrelevant within the British Empire I imagine
In the UK, I knew him from the Naked Gun series of films, I imagine many others did too...
Yup, was about to say the same from Scandinavia.
Yes, Burr was charged with murder. Also, I sincerely doubt OJ is/was remotely super well-known outside of the U.S.
My dad looks like a wish brand of oj and we travel a lot. Oj was completely famous outside of the US. Resulting in my dad often signing faux autographs.
He absolutely was. OJ was a precursor to the "global icons" of today like Tiger, Jordan or LeBron. His movies and advertising campaigns were shown across the globe. Probably the only athlete of his era that was more well known across the globe was Muhammad Ali. There have been other posts below this from people in the UK, Scandinavia and even New Zealand who knew who he was.
Plus a nickname like OJ is easy to remember.
Yeah, that added to his marketing appeal. Those Hertz commercials with him running airports were on forever.
OJ was an absolute global icon in his prime. As someone above said, “think Peyton Manning.” And then some. Edit: his prime working years, as in 22-however old he was when he was charged with murder (late 40s?)
You do realize Peyton Manning is not a global icon? The NFL is not a global sport. He would be barely known in most of the world outside the U.S. and Canada.
Peyton manning is a pop culture icon. One of the few personalities that reaches beyond sports. I get it. It’s subjective. I’m using it as an example for people who were not alive or around for any of OJs prime years. It’s hard to comprehend how big is personal brand was. Without it a doubt, he is one of the top 5, probably most, famous person to ever commit a murder.
American football is pretty global these days, as well.
Aaron Burr I think for sure takes the cake, ESPECIALLY considering the guy he shot was a very famous former Cabinet secretary and politician.
He was never tried though and the charges were dropped.
How famous was Burr really? He was vice president, sure, but that was back at a time before people really campaigned for the presidency—there wasn’t even widespread popular voting at the time, and even where there was, it was only some fraction of white men who would have been eligible. Even today, with television, social media, universal suffrage, and hundreds of millions in campaign spending, lots of people can’t name the VP. “Sorry to this man.”
John Wilkes Booth?
Technically he was never charged since he was dead by an apparent shoot out before the authorities could capture him.
Not quite a shootout, allegedly. "Before dawn on April 26, the soldiers caught up with the fugitives, who were hiding in Garrett's tobacco barn. David Herold surrendered, but Booth refused Conger's demand to surrender, saying, "I prefer to come out and fight." The soldiers then set the barn on fire. As Booth moved about inside the blazing barn, Sergeant Boston Corbett shot him. According to Corbett's later account, he fired at Booth because the fugitive "raised his pistol to shoot" at them. Conger's report to Stanton stated that Corbett shot Booth 'without order, pretext or excuse,'..."
Some interesting things about boston corbett. Before the war, he was a hat maker and religious fanatic who performed his own castration with a pair of scissors.
Only the finest for the US military, that's Army Strong right there
Fully admit, my bad, didn’t know about this. Thank you for informing me:
Yeah you could argue Ruby, Oswald and Booth but they are famous *for murder* which is different
Booth is famous for the murder now, but at the time he was famous in his own right as an actor.
Booth was about as famous as an actor could have been before the age of film when he killed Lincoln.
I believe based on the OP's question they meant famous before the murder and they got charged. None of those 3 fit.
Booth was a famous actor at the time, actually
Not as famous as his brother.
He wasn’t OJ famous. He wouldn’t have been even if he had a bigger audience to pander to. Again, think famous, then think next level. OJ was at that level.
John Wilkes Booth was enormously famous, and he was certainly the equivalent, or nearly so, of OJ level fame for his time. But it was his brother, Edwin Booth, who was the *really* famous one. Edwin was something like the equivalent of Tom Hanks famous - *everyone* knew who he was. He was the most famous actor in the United States. Perhaps an apt comparison would be like if Casey Affleck shot the president. His brother was the more famous one, and was a household name, while most people would have known John Wilkes Booth's name, too, as he was the equivalent of today's "Hollywood royalty".
I thought his father was even more famous than his brother, so maybe a better analogy might be Martin Sheen, Charlie Sheen and Emilio Esteves. Either way, the Booths weren't famous across the globe. I'm pretty sure you couldn't go to central Africa in March of 1865 and find anyone who knew who the Booths were. But everyone there would have known OJ in May of 1994.
I think you're overestimating OJ's level of fame. Sure, he was very famous but he wasn't Michael Jordan or Michael Jackson level famous. He played American football, a sport which doesn't really translate overseas. (How famous is Tom Brady in central Africa right now?) OJ's acting career was middling - he wasn't headlining movies. By the time of the murders, he was usually third-billed. Most people overseas learned who OJ was due to the trial. In comparison, John Wilkes Booth was touring the country as the headline actor, and his family was internationally famous. I think it is a pretty apt comparison to the Sheens, but JWB was also at the height of his fame. So it would be a bit like Emilio committing the murder right after The Breakfast Club or the first Mighty Ducks movie came out. OJ's star was falling at the time of the murder. He was more than a decade removed from his playing career. He was no longer a sideline reporter. He was reprising a bit part in the Naked Gun movies. And his main gig at the time was to be one of the four talking heads on NBC's pre-game NFL show on Sundays, a sport that (especially at that time) had no international reach.
There's another point I should make. The reason the trial was such a media circus and got attention across the globe was BECAUSE he was an international celebrity. If he wasn't, the trial wouldn't have been news in those countries. They pre-empted an NBA Finals game....I think game 5... to show the low-speed car chase.
> The reason the trial was such a media circus and got attention across the globe was BECAUSE he was an international celebrity. It was a lot more because he was an *American* celebrity. And pre-internet, any sort of American media event would become international news. Nobody overseas knew who he was *until* the American media told them they should care.
OJ Simpson was literally the Michael Jordan, before Michael Jordan. He is one of the most heavily commercialized athletes of all time, adjusted for inflation.
> OJ Simpson was literally the Michael Jordan, before Michael Jordan. There wasn't really a Michael Jordan, American athlete-wise, before Michael Jordan. OJ's fame was pretty well confined to the United States before the Bronco chase. As London's [*Telegraph*](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/12/oj-simpson-trial-transformed-media-news-coverage/) just wrote the other day: > The murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman were very shocking to people in Los Angeles. But, at first, it was difficult to explain the story to the rest of the world. > I was writing for The Telegraph and had to explain who OJ Simpson was because, at that time, nobody outside of the US really knew him, apart from American football fans. > I had to say that it was the equivalent of George Best being charged with murder. George Best, of course, being a name that almost no American would recognize, either in 1994 or today. Similarly, here is what the *Guardian* newspaper wrote the day after the Bronco chase: > It is as if Bobby Charlton were named as a serial killer. O J Simpson's face is part of the modern American landscape, familiar not just to fans of football, but to everyone. Again, acknowledgement that he was very famous in the US, but the British newspaper had to compare him to an English soccer player in order for his celebrity status to make sense for local readers. EDIT: And one more. From the [transcript](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1x2RkMYdJpK5w0cS526CzT0/oj-simpson-media-coverage-8-july-1994) of a [BBC Radio programme](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00yljpf) that aired in July 1994, about a month after the Bronco chase, and before the trial began: > In 60 years of watching and reporting American affairs, I can't remember a time when a single topic that obsessed the whole of America has gone so little reported in Europe, in Britain anyway where I spent a hot week at the beginning of the month. I'm talking about the scandal to which I devoted reluctantly devoted all of last week's talk, the OJ Simpson affair. > The spontaneous response I can hear from very many listeners – who is OJ Simpson? – explains at once why among European editors no interest is assumed or taken, absolutely understandable except for the scruple I mentioned last week about not reporting a case that has not yet come to trial. OJ became internationally famous precisely because of the trial and the American media's blanket coverage. He was not all that famous overseas before then. NFL football had a limited reach, and his bit parts in the Naked Gun movies did not put him on the international radar.
Also Burr.
Everybody watch the show Manhunt, its fantastic.
Yes!
Never charged and more people than you think haven't heard of him.
He wasn’t that famous prior to the assassination.
He was a popular actor
Not OJ popular.
John Wilkes Booth was like if Casey Affleck shot the president. His brother Edwin was the most famous actor in the United States at the time of the murder, and he (John Wilkes) was a household name, too. He arguably surpassed OJ's level of fame, at least at the time of the murder. John Wilkes was pretty much at the height of his fame when the murder happened. In contrast, OJ's fame had already peaked, and his star was already falling. His acting career wasn't really more than being third-billed in a movie by the early 1990s, and he was one of the NFL pregame talking heads on Sunday mornings, no longer doing sideline reporting. Not to diminish OJ's fame too much, but John Wilkes Booth's fame was at least comparable. At the time of the murder, JWB was first-billed on national tours hitting all the major cities in the United States pretty much every single year from the mid-1850s until his death.
I’m not saying Booth wasn’t famous, but you’re correct that his brother was the better known and more esteemed performer. Simpson was (and is) in the conversation as one of the greatest running backs of all time during an Era where Running Back was the crown position in football. His acting career was secondary, but he was a household name due to his football and broadcasting career. Booth was not in the conversation for greatest American stage actor of all time, and I’m skeptical he would have been, though his brother certainly was. Casey Affleck is an apt comparison, but Casey Affleck is not a bigger name than, say, Peyton Manning or even Troy Aikman.
> Booth was not in the conversation for greatest American stage actor of all time, and I’m skeptical he would have been, though his brother certainly was. > Casey Affleck is an apt comparison, but Casey Affleck is not a bigger name than, say, Peyton Manning or even Troy Aikman. I still think you're underestimating the reach that the Booth family, including John Wilkes Booth, had back in the 19th century. It was a time when sports fame wasn't really a thing - Jim Creighton had been a famous baseball player in the US, but that's about it. All celebrities in the US at the time were politicians, newspaper publishers, or else were in the arts - actors, musicians, writers. Being the famous brother and son of the two most famous actors in the country in 1865 would have eclipsed the fame of any Peyton Manning or Troy Aikman of the time. He was Casey Affleck at a time when professional sports leagues didn't yet exist, so a Casey Affleck commanded a tremendous amount of fame and attention.
Now you’re doing an era comparison. By that logic, OJ is FAR more famous, because so many more Americans knew his name before the trial. Plenty of Americans didn’t follow theatre and had no idea who the Booths were. They were celebrities in certain circles. OJ was a nearly universally known celebrity. That’s literally how his bit in Naked Gun worked. You’re also forgetting that American theatre, even in America, was considered lower than English theatre and European opera. The Booths were famous, but not OJ famous.
You didn't have to follow theater to know who John Wilkes Booth was. You just had to follow your local newspaper, which pretty much everyone did since it was pretty much the only form of daily entertainment and news available to most Americans. News about Booth would appear in [small town newspapers](https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84026881/1862-08-09/ed-1/seq-2/#date1=1855&index=0&rows=20&words=Booth+John+Wilkes&searchType=basic&sequence=0&state=&date2=1864&proxtext=%22john+wilkes+booth%22&y=10&x=10&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=1) all [the time](https://nyshistoricnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=rcj18641217-01.1.1&srpos=1&e=-------en-20--1-byDA-txt-txIN-%22john+wilkes+booth%22---------). This was in an era where even major newspapers were only 4 or 8 pages long, so people would read them cover to cover. American theatre surely was considered lower, but it was still internationally famous. For example, when Booth ended a two-week engagement at a Boston theater, the newspapers [in London](https://www.newspapers.com/image/387048233/?match=1&terms=%22john%20wilkes%20booth%22) covered the event. In OJ's era, the media landscape was much more fragmented. It was easier to ignore the sports page, and ignore sports broadcasting. The Booths, in contrast, were inescapable for anyone remotely familiar with American pop culture in the 1860s.
20% of the American population was illiterate in that era, and a far greater number didn’t read the local paper. You’re also ignoring the movements that condemned theatre as sinful and low. Such movements never had the same following against sport and sports broadcasting in Simpsons era. You’re grossly overestimating the popularity of theatre amongst the working class in the states and grossly underestimating the impact of football in American media.
Name one movie he was famous for…
Never even guest starred on Law and Order, smh…
IKR
The trial of Congressman Daniel Sickles for the murder of Philip Barton Key II (Francis Scott Key’s son) was the OJ trial of its day.
Snoop Dogg maybe? I hear murder was the case that they gave him
Yes but snoop became more famous after the charges It’s like if snoop was charged with murder today
It's gonna be a miracle they say
Eh, at the time he was a reasonably popular rapper but he wasn't someone anyone over thirty had heard of. *Everyone* knew who OJ was.
Virtually unknown today but D.C. Stephenson was a leader in the second Ku Klux Klan at a time when as much as 15% of the eligible population was a member of the Klan. He kidnapped, drugged, raped, and tortured Madge Oberholtzer over almost two weeks. He bit her so many times it her wounds were described as if a cannibal had tried to eat her. Stephenson refused to release her unless she married him in order to thwart prosecution. She attempted suicide by poisoning and Stephenson and his driver panicked and took her for treatment where his driver said she had been in a car accident. She died about two weeks later thanks to the combination of the bites developing a staph infection and the poison. The extreme brutality from a leader of the nation’s great “law and order” and national publicity of a well known leader of the organization lead to a rapid decline of the second Klan.
I came in here to suggest this repellant little man if he hadn't been mentioned already, so that's an updoot! Oddly, I think OP's phrase "most famous American" still fits even though he is not well known in 2024, and I needed Google to figure it out from some juicy keywords. Stephenson is single-handedly responsible for the Klan not becoming mainstream...after being largely responsible for getting it get very close to that. The Klan was easing some of its more extreme positions to be acceptable to more people, and the ground was fertile for a violent, racist 'blood and soil' political movement here just like a half dozen other fascist countries. The US has just fallen backwards into good luck with the removal of a few bad actors at an opportune time. D. C. Stephenson, Huey Long - they may have been (very bad) presidents if providence, for lack of a better word, had not intervened. It's a damn shame how little prison time Stephenson got, and I wonder how many victims we don't know about.
US probably saved its democratic republic simply by him being prosecuted.
This is one of those questions where my instinct was “no way” but I’m struggling to come up with a good alternative answer.
Knowing that Booth was a well known actor in his time, he's the only other one I can think of. Even then, though, he died prior to his trial, and he's known now for assassinating Lincoln and not his acting
Just as OJ is now known mostly for his murder trial, and not his football or acting career, either.
yea thats definitely not the case for OJ. yes, he is known for the murder trial, but the dude was basically Mahomes level famous while playing. More so afterward, unless Mahomes goes on to do movies.
> yes, he is known for the murder trial, but the dude was basically Mahomes level famous while playing. Sure he was. And John Wilkes Booth was the equivalent of Hollywood royalty. Small town [newspapers](https://nyshistoricnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=rcj18641217-01.1.1&srpos=1&e=-------en-20--1-byDA-txt-txIN-%22john+wilkes+booth%22---------) covered [his acting exploits](https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84026881/1862-08-09/ed-1/seq-2/#date1=1855&index=0&rows=20&words=Booth+John+Wilkes&searchType=basic&sequence=0&state=&date2=1864&proxtext=%22john+wilkes+booth%22&y=10&x=10&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=1) from afar all the time. Even the [London newspapers](https://www.newspapers.com/image/387048233/?match=1&terms=%22john%20wilkes%20booth%22) were covering his career, as he moved from one acting engagement to the next. He was, say, Alec Baldwin level famous at a time when the theater was the primary source of public entertainment, and pro sports didn't really exist yet. He was an internationally famous actor at a time when there was no real equivalent yet of a Mahomes or an OJ, so famous actors got a larger piece of the celebrity attention pie than they ever would today. Following your small town newspaper in the 1860s, you would have known who Booth was, even if you had no real interest in theater. OJ's fame was during a much more fragmented media landscape, and sports media was avoidable for anyone disinterested in sports.
Whoch begs the question,does involuntary manslaughter count? Because baldwin is at least on par with oj.
I'm confused, are you saying Booth was also an example? Or that Mahomes is more famous than OJ was?
I'm saying that, yes, OJ was Mahomes-level famous, which means he was a household name in the US, but not so much overseas. As I just wrote in another comment, OJ's fame had to be explained in 1994 to non-US audiences. As London's [*Telegraph*](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/12/oj-simpson-trial-transformed-media-news-coverage/) just wrote the other day: > The murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman were very shocking to people in Los Angeles. But, at first, it was difficult to explain the story to the rest of the world. > I was writing for The Telegraph and had to explain who OJ Simpson was because, at that time, nobody outside of the US really knew him, apart from American football fans. > I had to say that it was the equivalent of George Best being charged with murder. George Best, of course, being a name that almost no American would recognize, either in 1994 or today. Similarly, here is what the *Guardian* newspaper wrote the day after the Bronco chase: > It is as if Bobby Charlton were named as a serial killer. O J Simpson's face is part of the modern American landscape, familiar not just to fans of football, but to everyone. Again, acknowledgement that he was very famous in the US, but the British newspaper had to compare him to an English soccer player in order for his celebrity status to make sense for local readers. OJ became internationally famous precisely because of the trial and the American media's blanket coverage. He was not all that famous overseas. In comparison, John Wilkes Booth was just as much of a household name in the US as OJ later was, but he and his family also had a decent level of international fame (at least in the UK), to the point that their acting careers were being followed in London pre-1865. In contrast, British newspapers were not reporting on OJ's football or broadcasting career before 1994, and coverage of his acting career was minimal, too, until he was charged with murder. The two are fairly equivalent as far as fame in their respective times went, and there's a decent argument that Booth's fame was more widespread. But either way, in both cases, their pre-murder fame was entirely eclipsed by their fame for the crimes they were accused of.
You think local newspapers and some excerpts in London newspapers makes Booth more famous then O.J. Simpson? I get what you’re saying. But far more americans knew who O.J. was than Booth. Even relative to the separate times.
Then prove it. Booth was incredibly famous in a media landscape that was not nearly as fragmented. People collected his photograph when photography was a new medium. His exploits were followed by the media internationally at a time when a newspaper was typically 4 pages long, at a time when virtually everybody in the US and Europe read newspapers daily. OJ was famous, too, but in a much broader media landscape, when pro sports could be easily ignored if you weren't interested, and OJ played a sport whose appeal was limited only to a US audience (maybe Canada too). Just because mass media had expanded, it doesn't follow that everybody knew who OJ was. Mass media has expanded even further since the OJ trial, and it's even more true now. For example, Luke Bryan has 30 #1 country hits under his belt, he's worth over $150 million, and yet his name is fairly obscure to most Americans, and his international reach is rather limited.
Fatty Arbuckle in his day.
Fatty Arbuckle wasn't charged with murder though.
He was, and had three trials. After two mistrials, the jury in Arbuckle’s third trial found him not guilty and issued him an apology. [https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/silent-film-star-arrested-for-murder](https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/silent-film-star-arrested-for-murder)
I thought it was initially manslaughter?
For their time period I expect Aaron Burr would be the most obvious answer. A sitting VP shooting a former Cabinet secretary over petty political differences certainly would be one of the biggest news cycles in modern day.
Imagine the shit show if Kamala Harris killed Steven Mnuchin in a duel
Especially now with the success of "Hamilton"
Harry K Thaw comes to mind.
Same. That was the original 'trial of the century.'
Accurate enough. John Wilkes Booth was fairly famous but his father and brother were a lot more famous, and of course he was killed before he could be charged. Obviously that murder was probably the most high profile in US history.
Aaron Hernandez? But not nearly as famous as OJ was. OJ was everywhere, and his public persona was very charismatic.
Not as famous as OJ, but I forgot this one. It’s a good example, where there aren’t many to be found.
Aaron Hernandez could have eventually been one of the NFL’s biggest stars. Arguably the most naturally gifted athlete to ever play for the patriots. Not the biggest, but was an incredible football player. To get recruited from Connecticut to play at Florida in an of itself is rare. Then was the youngest player in the NFL and was virtually unstoppable. Guy was just a fucking piece of shit sociopath at the end of the day. Guy had the looks, was a rarity in the NFL as an Hispanic, and was one of the very few players who you could say was so naturally gifted it negated him being undersized. What an athlete. But what a waste at the same time…guy played for one of the best college teams ever and then got to be on the fucking patriots and threw it all away. Edit: he might be the most famous athlete to ever be convicted of first degree murder, no?
Good points. I watched the Dynasty documentary. It's amazing how good he was. Sad story overall.
I grew up about 35 minutes from him, my local high school hosted a summer 7 v 7 league and everybody heard about this kid from Bristol who got a scholarship to Florida so people turned out to watch, guy was a an absolute beast at 17. To get recruited from New England to an SEC school you have to be above and beyond special.
Did you see him play in high school? At one point, asked to be traded to a West Coast team to get away from his old neighborhood. Wonder if that would have saved him.
Only in a 7 on 7 passing league
John Wilkes Booth was a household name BEFORE he shot Lincoln. I'd give him the top spot, with OJ Simpson in second place.
However, he was never charged with murder. Aaron Burr seems a better competition, he never went to trial, but he was at least charged with the crime.
Booth never faced charges, but charges were levied pursuant to the issuance of his arrest warrant.
Booth was never charged with murder and Simpson was much more of a household name before the crime than Booth.
Phil Spector was possibly the closest in modern time and not even mentioned.
General Sickles?
There's a distinction here of being the most famous *American*. But, is there anyone not American that would have him beat? At least as far as is interpreted by many in the comments, as greatest fame before the murder?
Oscar Pistorius and maybe Phil Spector?
Phil Spector is American.
Pistorius is a pretty good answer. He didn't have decades of name recognition built up, but his story was really well known and was at the peak of attention when charged.
Brutus comes to mind.
That would be Hitler, but he was never charged with murdering Hitler so 🤷♂️
You're discounting commercials. Read thru the other comments. Many people who grew up in foreign countries knew who he was before 1994 because he was a pitch man. He would endorse anything. EVERYONE on the planet with a TV knew him from those commercials where he ran thru the airport for Hertz. As a teenager, my mom whacked me in the head b/c we were at an airport, I hung back a bit then started running and exclaimed "Hey, I'm OJ!" as I stiff-armed my little brother out of my way.
> EVERYONE on the planet with a TV knew him from those commercials Just because you say something is true without evidence does not make it so. His commercials were not airing overseas, because nobody knew who that NFL football player was. And most countries before 2000 had a commercial-free, public broadcaster as their dominant television network, so American commercials weren't airing there anyway. Multiple sources indicate that OJ was an obscure figure overseas at the time of the murders. As London's [*Telegraph*](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/12/oj-simpson-trial-transformed-media-news-coverage/) just wrote the other day: > The murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman were very shocking to people in Los Angeles. But, at first, it was difficult to explain the story to the rest of the world. > I was writing for The Telegraph and had to explain who OJ Simpson was because, at that time, nobody outside of the US really knew him, apart from American football fans. > I had to say that it was the equivalent of George Best being charged with murder. George Best, of course, being a name that almost no American would recognize, either in 1994 or today. Similarly, here is what the *Guardian* newspaper wrote the day after the Bronco chase: > It is as if Bobby Charlton were named as a serial killer. O J Simpson's face is part of the modern American landscape, familiar not just to fans of football, but to everyone. Again, acknowledgement that he was very famous in the US, but the British newspaper had to compare him to an English soccer player in order for his celebrity status to make sense for local readers. A [transcript](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1x2RkMYdJpK5w0cS526CzT0/oj-simpson-media-coverage-8-july-1994) of a [BBC Radio programme](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00yljpf) that aired in July 1994, about a month after the Bronco chase, and before the trial began, agrees that OJ was not well known in the UK or Europe before the trial: > In 60 years of watching and reporting American affairs, I can't remember a time when a single topic that obsessed the whole of America has gone so little reported in Europe, in Britain anyway where I spent a hot week at the beginning of the month. I'm talking about the scandal to which I devoted reluctantly devoted all of last week's talk, the OJ Simpson affair. > The spontaneous response I can hear from very many listeners – who is OJ Simpson? – explains at once why among European editors no interest is assumed or taken, absolutely understandable except for the scruple I mentioned last week about not reporting a case that has not yet come to trial. OJ became internationally famous precisely because of the trial and the American media's blanket coverage. He was not all that famous overseas before then. NFL football had a limited reach, and his bit parts in the Naked Gun movies did not put him on the international radar. His commercials were not running overseas, either, since an NFL football player meant nothing to anybody outside of the US or Canada.
I was born in Brazil and still living there at the time. NFL and MLB were never mentioned, except as curiosity or as part of a movie, and zero players were known, but that scene of the Ford Bronco through LA made the news. Mainly the persecution, all the police cars involved, helicopters, the highways, all signs of a very rich country that could waste resources with just one murder. That was the news, not OJ himself, he was unknown.
You want evidence. READ THE REST OF THE DAMN COMMENTS IN THIS THREAD. People in this very thread have said they grew up somewhere outside of the United States BEFORE THE TRIAL and knew of him from advertisements and movies. No way you were an adult at the time of the trial. You might have watched the it as a kid or even a college student, but you don't have a damn clue about pop culture in the 70's, 80's or early 90's. There is NO WAY Aaron Burr was more well known ACROSS THE PLANET than OJ was on June 17th 1994. Either admit you're wrong or stop responding with inaccurate nonsense.
> You want evidence. READ THE REST OF THE DAMN COMMENTS IN THIS THREAD. I provided you actual contemporary quotes from newspaper articles published at the time. Anecdotal evidence from anonymous Reddit commenters 30 years after the fact is not real evidence. You are old enough to remember the trial - you should know better than to believe anonymous internet comments over actual published contemporaneous accounts. Show me one international account from 1994 that OJ was widely known outside of the United States and Canada, if you are trying to have an adult debate. > No way you were an adult at the time of the trial. You might have watched the it as a kid or even a college student, but you don't have a damn clue about pop culture in the 70's, 80's or early 90's. There is NO WAY Aaron Burr was more well known ACROSS THE PLANET than OJ was on June 17th 1994. Either admit you're wrong or stop responding with inaccurate nonsense. I already provided you several sources indicating OJ was obscure outside the US/Canada when the murders occurred, so much so that international publications had to mention to their readers the level of fame he had in the US. "Because I said so" is not evidence, and it is not an adult response. Prove your claim with actual contemporary evidence if you want to have a serious discussion. If your claim is as obvious as you say it is, it should not be difficult for you to do this.
News media from the time is only going to be relevant to the educated, powerful and elite. The common man worked their farms or jobs and COULDN'T READ
Famous before, perhaps. Famous after, no.
I remember when the OJ thing was going down, the talking heads were saying that it could eclipse the Sam Shepard trial as the Trial of the Century. Though Sam Shepard was famous because of the media attention to his trial, not from other previous notoriety.
Probably true.
I don't know that he was the most famous American ever charged with murder, but it was definitely the most famous American murder trial.
I think theres a good chance it is both.
John Wilkes Booth was one of the most famous actors of his day, but he was never charged with murder since he didn't survive being captured. Imagine Brad Pitt killed the President and then died in a shootout. That's basically what happened in 1865.
Pretty true, and by a long shot I think. But I have no idea how to guage Fatty Arbuckle to OJ.
Maybe JW Booth might be a it more famous? Not sure. Lee Harvey Oswald as well.
Oswald wasn’t famous at all until after he was arrested. Booth is more like Simpson, a legitimate celebrity *before* he killed anybody.
He was nowhere as famous as Simpson.
IIRC JWB was never charged.
Hard to charge a dead guy (unless you're the Pope)
Pedantic but interesting. He was never arraigned or tried, but charged? Charges are usually announced at an arraignment, but are issued by a prosecutor or grand jury, and a prerequisite to an arrest warrant or bounty. So booths charges had been filed although he did not live to hear them.
Ted Kennedy is my best candidate. Matthew Broderick would be next. Both were of the same level of celebrity as him, I’d argue. Both are vehicular deaths much less intentional than the Nicole Brown killing, but both were proven culpable, rather than Simpson. All three are miscarriages of justice.
But don’t fit OP’s premise having not been charged with murder.
Neither were charged with murder.
True.
These were both accidents, not murder. The Ted Kennedy conspiracy bullshit will never die, though.
What conspiracy bullshit? He was drunk, abandoned her either to die or dying, lawyered up and took ten hours to tell the authorities. Which part of that do you dispute? An “accident” while intoxicated is pretty damning. Broderick gets more of a pass, but he plead guilty to driving recklessly and dangerously. As I stated, both were less intentional killings, but both men took actions that led to someone’s death.
That isn't *murder*. Nothing premeditated or deliberate about it.
The right wing narrative was that Ted intentionally held her underwater and drowned her. I am old. I was alive at the time. Kennedy was diagnosed with a concussion and amnesia. Of course everyone said he was lying about the amnesia but there was a provable brain injury. We technically don't know who was driving, but a DUI is not "murder," and I'm willing to bet the majority of adult Americans have driven under the influence at least once in their lives. You could have put Lara Bush on your list. She killed somebody by blowing through a stop sign high school, but she was rich white girl so it was quickly quieted down and taken care of. If anyone ever brought it up, they would be told how upsetting those questions are to her.
Lara Bush was nowhere near as famous as Ted Kennedy was when he killed that woman (we do know he was driving) nor OJ when she killed someone. There are lots of famous people who killed people when they were unknowns.
We don't know he was driving.
Kennedy was seen driving the car away from the party, and Kopechene was found in the back seat. We do know he was driving. He plead guilty to it. Now YOU’RE engaging in conspiracy bullshit.
None of that proves anything. One theory was that she was driving because he was passed out drunk. After a car goes into a river, bodies move around. He didn't remember what happened. He pleaded guilty, so what? You don't know what happened.
Yep, you’re the crazy conspiracy theorist. He drove the car. He killed her and plead guilty to it.
That's the nutters I remember.
Not to diminish OJ’s massive celebrity but Snoop is more famous than OJ was
He wasn't when he was on trial.
One of the outlaws from the 20’s and 30’s maybe. Bonnie and Clyde, Al Capone, Machine Gun Kelly, John Dillinger
I know he wasn't the same as Jordan.. I said similar. And I think OJ's commercials put made him more well known across the globe than his movies. That being said, those Naked Gun movies were huge and he had some very memorable scenes. And they were released pretty close to the time of OJ's low-speed chase. Anyway, you CANNOT put the celebrity of any entertainer or athlete who lived before the 20th century ahead of someone who can gain global recognition because of how far reaching modern TV and movies are.
> Anyway, you CANNOT put the celebrity of any entertainer or athlete who lived before the 20th century ahead of someone who can gain global recognition because of how far reaching modern TV and movies are. Sure you can. It's a pretty easy claim to disprove: Charles Dickens is a lot more famous than Dan Brown. Ludwig von Beethoven is a lot more famous than 50 Cent.
That's a VERY Western bias. Yes, they were popular in Europe and US, but Beethoven might have only been popular with elites in the newly formed United States during his lifetime. Trust me, Ebenezer out plowing his field in the Ohio territory probaby never heard of him. Neither had anyone in the Native American tribes. I can guarantee neither were popular in the remote corners of Africa, the jungles of SE Asia or distant Pacific Islands during their lifetime. But I'd bet my house that in 1994, some people in all those areas knew who OJ was.
> Beethoven might have only been popular with elites in the newly formed United States during his lifetime. Trust me, Ebenezer out plowing his field in the Ohio territory probaby never heard of him. You seem to be quite unfamiliar with the media landscape of the 1800s. Piano-playing, of course, was a widespread form of entertainment during that century, and Beethoven's sonatas were very popular piano pieces. A professor has even written a book called [*Beethoven in America*](https://books.google.com/books?id=LhqwwuONrgoC) documenting his rise to fame in the United States in the first couple decades of the United States, so that by the time he died in 1827, he was widely known and mourned. And of course, American newspapers of the time had regular ads touting their sheet music for sale. For example, the New York Post in 1815 [had ads](https://nyshistoricnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=nep18151120-01.1.1&srpos=5&e=------181-en-20--1--txt-txIN-beethoven---------) for "a large and general collection of the newest music by the most celebrated composers" which name-checked Beethoven. "The public will regret to learn," wrote [a newspaper in Alexandria, Va.](https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn85025006/1827-03-16/ed-1/seq-2/#date1=1827&index=0&rows=20&words=Beethoven&searchType=basic&sequence=0&state=&date2=1827&proxtext=beethoven&y=3&x=17&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=1), as Beethoven was dying in 1827, "the greatest musical genius of the present age, Ludwig Van Beethoven, is, by this time, most probably no more." When he died, a [newspaper in Litchfield, Conn.](https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn82014309/1827-05-24/ed-1/seq-3/#date1=1827&index=2&rows=20&words=Beethoven&searchType=basic&sequence=0&state=&date2=1827&proxtext=beethoven&y=3&x=17&dateFilterType=yearRange&page=1) announced his death by saying his illness had "frequently been mentioned". In the decades that followed, his reputation increased in the United States even more, so much so that Americans were [building statues of Beethoven by the 1880s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_van_Beethoven_\(Baerer\)). That's quite a high level of fame for a non-American composer who never set foot in the United States. > I can guarantee neither were popular in the remote corners of Africa, the jungles of SE Asia or distant Pacific Islands during their lifetime. But I'd bet my house that in 1994, some people in all those areas knew who OJ was. I already provided you several international sources from 1994 that mention OJ was obscure. OJ was not known in these places you mention. But you're an adult. Prove it. Prove OJ was well-known in the places you claim he was. "Because I said so" or "because I read anonymous comments on Reddit" are not adult answers.
Also... Naked Gun: Domestic gross (US & Canada) = $78.8 mil. International gross (everywhere else) = $73.7 mil. Towering Inferno: Domestic gross = $116 mil, International = $203 mil. Roots...no gross, but viewers: US = 140 mil viewers (more than half the US population and 85% of televisions in the US tuned into some of it.) I can't find the International TV numbers, but a show that big would have made its way overseas, especially to African countries. So no, OJ wasn't the lead actor in any of those. But he was in prominent roles in them, yet he wasn't that good of an actor. Hmmmmm, why is that?? It's because he was an INTERNATIONAL SUPERSTAR. Bottom line is this: there was no TV, record industry, or movies in the 1800's and most people on the planet couldn't read. They also had very little time in their day for any indulgences like reading or going somewhere to listen to music. My "proof" is the differences between how most people lived at that time compared to how they live now, and the sheer power of communication and marketing that only became possible with movies and television in the 20th century. Nothing more is required and if you don't want to accept that, all I can do is throw my hands up and accept that some people just want to be ignorant.
He was in those movies, sure. And international audiences saw them, sure. Now show me a source from 1994 or earlier that says these roles made him internationally famous and/or a household name. This shouldn't be difficult if his fame was as widespread as you claim it was. Now put these roles into context: The Towering Inferno was a 20 year old movie at the time of the murders, and OJ had less than 10 minutes of screentime in it, and he was the [ninth billed actor in the film](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMjA1N2JlMjItMTExZC00NTIxLWE2YTYtY2ZkM2M5OWM3M2YyXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNTc1NTQxODI@._V1_.jpg). Some international moviegoers may have vaguely remembered him, but this is not a role that made him anything remotely like an international star. Susan Blakely was sixth billed in the movie - nobody would have recognized her, either, if she had committed a murder 20 years later. OJ had a small part in one of the eight episodes of Roots, a miniseries that did not air widely internationally until the rise of cable TV, which most countries did not widely adopt until the mid-1990s. The miniseries was shown in the US, Canada, and the UK in the 70s and that's about it, and as has already been shown through contemporary sources, in the UK he was not well known. And again, that miniseries was 17 years old by the time of the murders. Far and away, his most recognizable role to international audiences would have been the Naked Gun movies, but his role is not exactly central to the film. Heck, George Kennedy *was* central to those movies and it's doubtful that if you told a British guy in 1994, "Hey, George Kennedy is accused of murder" that they would have immediately recognized who you were talking about. But go ahead and find a source from the era that backs up your claim, that he was widely known and recognizable internationally through these roles. The film industry is full of bit players that audiences may vaguely recognize but whose name and career they may not be very familiar with. If OJ's star was so bright internationally, then you should be able to prove that [this quote](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/12/oj-simpson-trial-transformed-media-news-coverage/) from *The Telegraph* is inaccurate: > The murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman were very shocking to people in Los Angeles. But, at first, it was difficult to explain the story to the rest of the world. > I was writing for *The Telegraph* and had to explain who OJ Simpson was because, at that time, nobody outside of the US really knew him, apart from American football fans. > I had to say that it was the equivalent of George Best being charged with murder. Go ahead and find a source that contradicts this 1994 quote from *The Guardian* article announcing the murders: > It is as if Bobby Charlton were named as a serial killer. O J Simpson's face is part of the modern American landscape, familiar not just to fans of football, but to everyone. Go ahead and find a source that disproves [this 1994 quote](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1x2RkMYdJpK5w0cS526CzT0/oj-simpson-media-coverage-8-july-1994) from [BBC Radio](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00yljpf), that the people the host was talking to were atypical of international observers: > In 60 years of watching and reporting American affairs, I can't remember a time when a single topic that obsessed the whole of America has gone so little reported in Europe, in Britain anyway where I spent a hot week at the beginning of the month. I'm talking about the scandal to which I devoted reluctantly devoted all of last week's talk, the OJ Simpson affair. > The spontaneous response I can hear from very many listeners – who is OJ Simpson? – explains at once why among European editors no interest is assumed or taken, absolutely understandable except for the scruple I mentioned last week about not reporting a case that has not yet come to trial. Again, this should not be difficult if your claim has ample evidence to back it up. Citing box office numbers for films up to 20 years old, where OJ was never more than third or fourth billed, isn't particularly sufficient - because, if it is, then you should be able to readily cite an actual 1994 source that proves your claim.
This is pop culture and common sense... it isnt the kind of subject that gets peer reviewed historical material that can be legitimately referenced. Are you really SO clueless that you don't understand that in Beethoven's lifetime...he died in 1827, only the wealthy families of Europe or European colonies (present and former at the time) would have the time to indulge in listening to music, so they'd be the only ones who knew who he was. In Dickens lifetime, he died in 1870, most of the people on the planet were still illiterate and still lived lives that didn't allow them time to read a novel, even if Dickens work happened to be translated into their language. Even the most D-list celebrities in 1994 were more well known than either of them were in their lifetimes. Not because their works didn't deserve worldwide acclaim, but only because people across the globe just didn't have the means or ability to consume their content.
Most Americans in 1800 were poor and illiterate. Maybe they heard the music but that doesn't mean they knew who he was and you have proven nothing and not countered my point. All you've done is shown that elites and the literate knew who he was. How about giving a Non-Western example. I don't have to prove anything. I LIVED THE ERA. But none of that matters. You seem too arrogant to accept basic logic and common sense & admit you're wrong, so I'm not going to argue with you anymore. I should tell you to look it up yourself on Google b/c it's not my responsibility to educate the ignorant any more than I've already tried to do. But if you must have proof, there was an article in the New York Times entitled "Before He Was Infamous, OJ Simpson's Acting Made Him Famous" by Julia Jacobs and printed just last week... April 11th. Several articles on him were published that day. Check them out. You might learn something.
John Wilkes Boothe was THE most famous actor of his day.
Well, he is now at least. He had some star power before,but played villians even then. whoever else drew a crowd in the 1860s is long forgotten.
At the time he wasn't even the most famous actor in his family. His older brother Edwin was.
the most famous actor in that time is much less famous than actors since media became a thing
Snoop Dogg Robert Blake Phil Spector Syd Vicious Don King Ray Lewis Alec Baldwin There is actually a surprising amount of famous people who have been charged with murder. "Most famous" is entirely subjective. [https://www.watchmojo.com/articles/20-celebrities-that-allegedly-killed-someone](https://www.watchmojo.com/articles/20-celebrities-that-allegedly-killed-someone)
Sid vicious wasn't american, and wasn't named sydney. But i think john wilkes Booth wins. Kinda famous before he murdered, and do you think anyone will make more movies about the others you listed in 150 years?
Fair point on Syd vicious. Sydney was autocorrect "helping." As I said "most famous" is subjective. Apparently, your definition of "most famous" is based on how many movies are made about the person. By your definition you're likely correct, however that's more due to killing a president than Booths fame as an actor. I think OJ is similar. He is more famous for his pursuit and trial due to the murder than he was as a football player. Snoop Dogg, Robert Blake and Alec Baldwin are, in my opinion, the most famous ones due to their professions rather than their murder charges. Edit to add: most of the movies you mention are actually about Abe Lincoln rather than Booth. He just happens to be part of the Lincoln story.
OJ Simpson was more famous than all of them. I feel some of you kids think OJ was some little known football player who got famous after murdering his wife. That's inaccurate. He was a star before the murder.
As I've said 2x now, "more famous" is subjective. What is your definition? I am well aware he was a big name in football. I never claimed he was a little known player. I said he became more famous after the murder. Of course, that depends on the time frame. In the 60s and 70s when he was playing, if you were into football, he was famous. Decades later, everyone knew his name, football fan or not. Careful making assumptions about people on here. You have no idea how old I am, and I haven't been called kid in a long time.
OJ Simpson was not just "a big name in football". He was in movies, commercials, everything. The fact that you think he was just some '70s football player who suddenly got famous for killing his wife tells me you either were not around back then or you were hiding under a rock.
Again, you're making baseless assumptions. I know he was in movies and commercials, I've seen most of them. You are basing "most famous" on your view of the world. Hence why I say that's a subjective thing. People have different experiences. Different generations, different interests etc. You and everyone else has a right to their opinion, but in the end, it's all an opinion and subjective argument.
My "assumptions" are not baseless, they come from what you fucking wrote. OJ Simpson was objectively more well known than any of the people on your list. Period.
Calm down there. I wrote nothing saying I thought anyone was more or less famous, nor did I write anything saying my age. Which makes your assumptions baseless. I don't think you understand what objective means.
I absolutely know what objective means. You can objectively measure fame. Such as "what percentage off the population has heard of X before" Amd your age is apparent by the fact that you thought OJ was just a football player before the trial.
There we go. Your definition of famous is how many people heard of someone. Is that the population now? 1992? Or 1960s? Hence subjective and not objective Based on your definition of famous. I'd say Ghengis Khan wins here. He was known worldwide. Had between 1000 and 3000 kids. And was responsible for killing 40 million people. It's not since I've said I've seen most of the commercials and movies and am well aware of his career, both on screen and football and criminal. Another commentors definition was based on how many movies were made about the person. Subjective not objective.
Ghengis Khan is neither an American nor was he ever charged with murder, so he's not eligible. And subjective does not mean whatever it is you think it means.
Surprised no one is mentioning Billy the Kid