Post User Polls

Do you think the Smithsonian was right to reject O.J. Simpson's 1995 trial suit?

By Jodi Westrick  |  March 3, 2010; 8:39 AM ET  | Category:  National Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: Did Sen. Jim Bunning overstep bounds to block jobs bill? | Next: Did Rep. Charles Rangel make the right move?


Please email us to report offensive comments.

what's the purpose? there are more important things to remember in life.

Posted by: icebluekoolaid1 | March 3, 2010 9:11 PM

Hey, as long as they've got Skip Gates' handcuffs. I think one iconic item from a preposterously self-serving man's encounter with the law will suffice for now.

Posted by: redlineblue | March 4, 2010 6:55 AM

The Smithsonian is meant for articles of actual historical significance, not this ridiculous rubbish!

Posted by: AutumnBanter | March 4, 2010 9:11 AM

The Smithsonian should have accepted the suit. It is part of US history. The OJ Simpson trial was the gateway to a level of crassness that we hadn't previously seen. Opinions on whether or not OJ was guilty were swayed more by racial allegiance than by facts, and this happened publicly.
The value of the suit as a part of history is on par with Monica Lewinsky's blue dress, which the Smithsonian did accept.

Posted by: greeenmtns | March 4, 2010 10:40 AM

Lewinsky's dress helped to lose the election of 2000 for Al Gore. That's a whole lot more significant that a football player/bad actor's suit.

Posted by: djmolter | March 4, 2010 11:23 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company