Here's my take on O.J., if anyone cares ...
1. He was acquitted in a court of law. Obviously, the evidence was not in his favor, but the L.A. district attorney's office, through numerous procedural blunders (with no help from the LAPD), thoroughly dicked up that case.
2. I don't buy the "cancer" story until I see it from a more reputable source than the Enquirer. About the only story they've actually been right on is the John Edwards illegitimate child scandal.
3. If the cancer story IS true, and he's trying to get the same concessions that other terminally ill inmates have received, we can't use the Nicole killing against him. Like it or not, he was acquitted. Was he guilty of that crime? Probably. But the L.A. district attorney's office tried him, and was found wanting. The harsher sentence for the crime he received in Nevada, as well as holding against him a crime of which he was acquitted, smacks to me of double jeopardy.