![\"\"](\"https:\/\/stateofthenation2012.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/07\/595a30251800001a0067287d.jpg\")
<\/a>MYUNG CHUN\/AFP\/Getty Images<\/p><\/div>\n
By CAITLIN FLYNN
\nBUSTLE<\/p>\n
It’s safe to say that public interest in the O.J. Simpson case hasn’t waned \u2014 in 2016,\u00a0The People v. O.J. Simpson: American Crime Story<\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0O.J.: Made In America<\/em>\u00a0garnered critical acclaim and high ratings. Now, the case will be explored from another angle when\u00a0Is O.J. Innocent? The Missing Evidence<\/em>premieres on Investigation Discovery<\/a>\u00a0on Sunday, Jan. 15.\u00a0American Crime Story<\/em>and\u00a0Made in America<\/em>\u00a0both stayed fairly neutral when it came to the matter of Simpson’s guilt versus innocence in the murders of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman. (Simpson was acquitted of both murders during his criminal trial and was\u00a0found liable for their deaths<\/a>\u00a0during the ensuing civil trial. He has consistently maintained his innocence.) But, as its title suggests, Investigation Discovery is taking a different approach and it will focus on various theories, one of which claims that\u00a0O.J. Simpson’s son Jason allegedly played a role in the murders<\/a>\u00a0of Brown Simpson and Goldman. Jason has never been considered a suspect or charged in connection with the murders. Producers for the series reached out to Jason and he did not respond. Bustle could not reach Jason for comment.<\/p>\n Jason was never considered a suspect in the murders and thus has never publicly commented on any such allegations, but that hasn’t stopped some from speculating. According to\u00a0The Hollywood Reporter<\/em>,\u00a0Is O.J. Innocent?<\/em>\u00a0is based on William Dear’s 2012 book<\/a>\u00a0titled\u00a0O.J. Is Innocent and I Can Prove It,\u00a0<\/em>which has been discredited by many publications. The outlet reports that Dear claims to have “hard evidence” proving the football star is innocent \u2014 and, in his book, he claimed that evidence allegedly pointed towards Jason.<\/p>\n POOL\/AFP\/Getty Images<\/p><\/div>\n Dear’s theory, which Investigation Discovery will look at, postulates that Jason (who was 24 at the time of the murders) allegedly killed Brown Simpson and Goldman in a fit of rage and O.J. Simpson came to the scene to help his son cover up the crime. As outlined by\u00a0Business Insider<\/em>, Dear claimed in his book that\u00a0Jason had allegedly been diagnosed with “intermittent rage disorder”<\/a>\u00a0and was prescribed the drug Depakote to control it \u2014 the outlet noted it could not confirm the validity of this statement. Dear’s book made several claims that have never been verified and alleged that Jason abused alcohol and cocaine, had a history of attempting suicide, and “nearly killed” a former girlfriend with a knife during a fit of rage. Again,\u00a0Business Insider<\/em>\u00a0emphasized that it couldn’t corroborate any of these claims.<\/p>\n According to\u00a0Business Insider<\/em>, Dear also claimed that Jason’s alibi was weak, he owned a cap that resembled the one found at the crime scene, and Simpson hired a lawyer to represent his son four days before his own arrest. Dear’s claims have been widely criticized and discredited by outlets including\u00a0The Village Voice<\/em><\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0The Telegraph<\/em><\/a>\u00a0<\/em>and they haven’t received much media attention until now. According to\u00a0The Village Voice<\/em>‘s article on the subject, Jason testified in a civil deposition that “he was never interviewed by either the LAPD or the D.A.’s office in the wake of the killings,” while statements from police and prosecutors “suggest that Jason was never considered a suspect.”<\/p>\n Lead prosecutor Marcia Clark has weighed in on Dear’s claims \u2014\u00a0in an April 2016 interview with\u00a0<\/a>TODAY<\/a><\/em>, she expressed outrage about Investigation Discovery’s documentary and described the allegations against Jason as “offensive.” She went on to tell Savannah Guthrie that: “It is nonsense, because there is no real logic, there’s no evidence, there’s nothing to back it up, nothing.” But, as\u00a0Is O.J. Innocent?<\/em>\u00a0illustrates, the public remains fascinated with every angle of this case, even decades later.<\/p>\n<\/a>