Timeline (for whatever it's worth)

[2L8 4A D8]

Since the Timeline that was posted by Wukong so many months ago has been deleted, I found this under "The OJ Simpson Murder Case." How accurate it is, is anybody's guess. Maybe some of our more illustrious posters can decipher what is accurate and what is not.

http://www.courttv.com/casefiles/simpson/new_docs/timeline.html

[limakey]

IMO,

The timeline is truly the only neutral evidence there was in this case. It was critical, yet the DA's had a few witnesses who could have really narrowed it down, but didn't.

They didn't use two eyewitnesses. They didn't use the children. They used the dog's "wailing" but not the "barking".

And Mr. August, you are wrong. When Steven Swab took the dog home, he gave it some water and then tried to have the dog lead him back to his "home". The dog lead him to the corner of the street and started barking and refused to go any further. When the other couple took the dog, the dog was pacing back and forth, going by the door. When they reached the very same corner, less then an hour later, the dog was basically dragging them not only to the condo but to Nicole's body.

The cops who saw Steven Swab said they would call animal control, when he realized they weren't called, that is when he tried to lead the dog "home". The dog wouldn't do it.

OJ knew that Sydney had a friend staying over and her parents picked her up after the phone call. Dr. Jennifer Ameli said that she called Nicole that night---that is when Nicole told her that OJ was mad and that there was no way that OJ would let her get away with what she did that night--it was Dr. Ameli who said she suggested that Nicole come and have a friend sit with her until OJ's plane left or until she knew he was gone.

That is two people who gave statements to the police who went out of their way to try to explain why Ron Goldman was there that night. Faye Resnick and Dr. Ameli. Why would they do that? Why wasn't Cora surprised that Nicole was not killed alone and why did she know that if it wasn't Ron Goldman, it had to be another waiter?

Mr. August, so not only did the DA's refuse to use two eyewitnesses, but they also refused to use a Doctor who said she called Nicole that night and that Nicole told her OJ was going to get her that night. When I read that, I was even more baffled why this "trigger" wasn't used. Certainly this trigger carried more weight then the b.s. ones the DA's and the Plaintiff's came up with. So now Nicole is telling a witness that she knows that OJ is going to get her that night, and she doesn't testify?

[2L8 4A D8]

Limakey: I don't think that your post was what I had in mind for this Thread. I thought that it could be used as a reference tool, if anything. It should really be just a Sticky!

JMO and MOO!!

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by limakey
IMO,

The timeline is truly the only neutral evidence there was in this case. It was critical, yet the DA's had a few witnesses who could have really narrowed it down, but didn't.

They didn't use two eyewitnesses. They didn't use the children. They used the dog's "wailing" but not the "barking".

And Mr. August, you are wrong. When Steven Swab took the dog home, he gave it some water and then tried to have the dog lead him back to his "home". The dog lead him to the corner of the street and started barking and refused to go any further. When the other couple took the dog, the dog was pacing back and forth, going by the door. When they reached the very same corner, less then an hour later, the dog was basically dragging them not only to the condo but to Nicole's body.

The cops who saw Steven Swab said they would call animal control, when he realized they weren't called, that is when he tried to lead the dog "home". The dog wouldn't do it.

OJ knew that Sydney had a friend staying over and her parents picked her up after the phone call. Dr. Jennifer Ameli said that she called Nicole that night---that is when Nicole told her that OJ was mad and that there was no way that OJ would let her get away with what she did that night--it was Dr. Ameli who said she suggested that Nicole come and have a friend sit with her until OJ's plane left or until she knew he was gone.

That is two people who gave statements to the police who went out of their way to try to explain why Ron Goldman was there that night. Faye Resnick and Dr. Ameli. Why would they do that? Why wasn't Cora surprised that Nicole was not killed alone and why did she know that if it wasn't Ron Goldman, it had to be another waiter?

Mr. August, so not only did the DA's refuse to use two eyewitnesses, but they also refused to use a Doctor who said she called Nicole that night and that Nicole told her OJ was going to get her that night. When I read that, I was even more baffled why this "trigger" wasn't used. Certainly this trigger carried more weight then the b.s. ones the DA's and the Plaintiff's came up with. So now Nicole is telling a witness that she knows that OJ is going to get her that night, and she doesn't testify?



limakey, there you go again basing your opinions only on what happened in the criminal trial. When is it going to dawn on you how much more information there is to learn after the criminal trial that you know nothing about?

The time line of the murders was established by Robert Heidstra, Jill Shively, Kato Kaelin, and Allan Park.

No, I'm not wrong when I said that the dog followed Schwab home. I was responding to your ridiculous statement that the if the dog refused to lead Schwab back to his home than that somehow means Simpson is innocent. I thought you were referring to when Schwab first encountered the Akita. And even later when Schwab attempted to walk the dog back to Bundy and it kept pulling away has absolutely nothing to do with Simpson's innocence.

You say the parents of Sydney's friend picked her up after that telephone call. What telephone call? Are you saying that it was after Simpson called at about 9:00? And if you are what evidence do you know that tells you that?

We know why Ron Goldman was at Bundy that night, to drop off Juditha Brown's eyeglasses.

In his book Petrocelli wrote about Dr. Amelli and the meetings he had with her. He was able to substantiate a lot of what she said but in the end even though he put her on his witness list he decided not to call her.

Petrocelli wrote,
"Whether or not she was telling the truth, we could not allow her testimony to turn the proceedings into the trial of Jennifer Amelli. The defense would have loved that: If Jennifer Amelli is not telling the truth; then O.J. Simpson is innocent. If she's a nitwit, you must acquit. This was not acceptable. We had a better case against Simpson than we did defending Amelli.
Nevertheless, if Amelli is telling the truth, what happened is far more horrific than we realized, and Marcus Allen is at the center of it. Simpson found out Nicole was seeing Allen. She called the Sojurn battered women's shelter on June 7, looking for help. He was beating her again."

I agree that the prosecutors may have had a stronger case if they had possibly called Dr. Amelli. I have no idea what they knew about her, or what she was saying, or if they ever considered using her as a witness. Armelli's name was not mentioned at all in Clark's book.

.The "trigger" that gave Simpson the opportunity that night was Gigi's telephone call she made to him at 8:00 PM. If Gigi had never called Simpson and had returned to Rockingham that Sunday night as she had planned to do, then the murders would never have happened that night.

bobaugust

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust

*Snipped*

The time line of the murders was established by Robert Heidstra, Jill Shively, Kato Kaelin, and Allan Park.

bobaugust

August,

Shively contradicts Kato..
Park contradicts himself..
The evidence at Bundy contradicts Heidstra..

[limakey]

Mr. August,

Neither Dr. Ameli or Faye Resnick knew anything about Ron being there to drop off glasses---unless of course, you believe Nicole cooked up the plan for her mother to lose her glasses and that is how she was going to lure Ron into bed.

The more you post that you, clearly, in your posts believe Jill is telling the truth only weakens your "case". Because if she was so crucial in the timeline, then she would have been called as a witness. Not even Petrocelli would touch her---why?

If you use any part of the Dog's "testimony" for your timeline, then you can't ignore his behavior or only accept the parts that work for you and then refuse to consider the rest of it. IMO.

Ever since you have been here on this board, you have made it clear how you felt about the criminal trial jury. To continue to post about "new evidence" is not only too funny for words, it is par for your course. Tell me Mr. August, what "new evidence" in the civil trial was really "new"?

Nice try with Petrocelli and Ameli, I noticed that you did not mention that she was approached and told to stop talking about Ron Goldman, why? If OJ was behind the murders, then why the warning to stop talking about Ron?

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by limakey
Mr. August,

Neither Dr. Ameli or Faye Resnick knew anything about Ron being there to drop off glasses---unless of course, you believe Nicole cooked up the plan for her mother to lose her glasses and that is how she was going to lure Ron into bed.

The more you post that you, clearly, in your posts believe Jill is telling the truth only weakens your "case". Because if she was so crucial in the timeline, then she would have been called as a witness. Not even Petrocelli would touch her---why?

If you use any part of the Dog's "testimony" for your timeline, then you can't ignore his behavior or only accept the parts that work for you and then refuse to consider the rest of it. IMO.

Ever since you have been here on this board, you have made it clear how you felt about the criminal trial jury. To continue to post about "new evidence" is not only too funny for words, it is par for your course. Tell me Mr. August, what "new evidence" in the civil trial was really "new"?

Nice try with Petrocelli and Ameli, I noticed that you did not mention that she was approached and told to stop talking about Ron Goldman, why? If OJ was behind the murders, then why the warning to stop talking about Ron?



limakey, what makes you think Resnick or Amelli should have known about Juditha Brown's eyeglasses? Nicole found out about her mother's eyeglasses and then talked to Ron at the Mezzaluna Restaurant about ten minutes before he left the restaurant that night. Nicole and Ron were killed less than an hour later.

The facts that Jill Shively testified to were never disputed or contradicted by anyone. Clark made a bad decision to drop Shively. If you read Wagner's article about this you would learn that Clark was misled with false information into making that decision. Petrocelli never mention's Shively. I agree with Wagner's opinion that "Petrocelli apparently considers that Shively's reputation has been so thoroughly ruined that he does not even mention her."

Your comments about using part of the dogs behavior doesn't make any sense. We know when the Akita started it's unusual non stop barking from Robert Heidstra. We know that Karpf saw the barking Akita in the street when he got home about 10:45. We know that shortly after that Schwab encountered the Akita and it followed him home. Schwab testified he got home about 11:00. So tell me what do you think the dog did that somehow contradicts the time of the murders?

New evidence in the civil trial:
Over thirty photographs from two different photographers show Simpson wearing the exact same shoes that left the bloody shoe prints at Bundy. Bruno Magli Lorenzo Style with Silga soles.
New test results presented by Dr. Robin Cotton proving that Nicole's blood found on Simpson's sock could not have come from her autopsy sample.
New information that Paula Barbieri dumped Simpson the day of the murders in a message she left on his cell phone at 7:00 AM the morning of June 12, 1994.
Simpson's telephone records that prove Simpson called his message center, forwarded that message from his cell phone and listened to it two times on his home telephone. The first time at 6:56 PM and then again at 8:55 PM.
Dr. Lenore Walker's notes that Simpson told her he called his message center and call forwarded Paula's message.
Simpson called Nicole's condo at 9:00 PM the night of the murders.
Leslie Gardner testified that the sweat suits she bought for Simpson were left at his house after the completion of the exercise video.
Simpson testified. Simpson's story changes, fabrications, and lies confirmed his guilt

Petrocelli never wrote anything about Amelli being approached and told to stop talking about Ron Goldman If she was approached, who approached her and told her that, and what does that have to do with all the evidence that proves Simpson was the killer?

bobaugust

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by socaldiva


I think you are confused again.


Socal

Show me how I'm confused...

Shively said she saw OJ at 10:45p and also saw his arm.
Kato said OJ was in a long sleeve shirt and someone banged on his wall at 10:45p...

Heidstra claim the gate at Nicoles condo was slammed shut.. Yet when the bodies were found the gate was WIDE OPEN..

Alan Park, guessed OJs weight and height from across a dark driveway, and had never met OJ prior to that night.. Yet, Park believed he saw a second car parked behind the Bentley and he didn't recall seeing the Bronco as he left the Rockingham gate..

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust

*Snipped

New evidence in the civil trial:
Over thirty photographs from two different photographers show Simpson wearing the exact same shoes that left the bloody shoe prints at Bundy. Bruno Magli Lorenzo Style with Silga soles.

bobaugust


August,

Using the headline "New Evidence" to describe some 3 years undeveloped pictures is insulting.. If you believe for 1 second that these guys didn't know long before the Criminal Trial stated, what the content of that film was, you are SERIOUSLY IN DENIAL..

The Prosecution knew as well, everything was price to sell to the HIGHEST bidders.. For example, not implying anything about the Browns, just as a reference.. They sold Nicole's wedding photos among other things. You cannot convince me these photographers cared more for Nicole's memory than her own family..

That last part was not an attack on the Brown family or their character.. I merely used them and that act as an example to drive my point home!

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Socal

Show me how I'm confused...

Shively said she saw OJ at 10:45p and also saw his arm.
Kato said OJ was in a long sleeve shirt and someone banged on his wall at 10:45p...

Heidstra claim the gate at Nicoles condo was slammed shut.. Yet when the bodies were found the gate was WIDE OPEN..





nettathirty, you're confused because you're quoting estimated times. Estimated times are not real times and do not tell us when an event actually happened, only approximately when it happened.

The order events happened in tell us what Simpson did that night.

The only known real times we know of are times that are supported by telephone records. Park saw Kaelin come from around Simpson's house with a flashlight after he heard the thumps on his wall. Almost simultaneously Park saw Simpson walk from the driveway into the light from the front entrance of his house, enter the door, and lights came on downstairs in the house. Park was talking on the phone at the time so we know that time to be about 10:55 PM.

It took both Kaelin and Simpson about three to four minutes to get to the front of the house after Kaelin heard the thumps each going their own way. That means Simpson fell against that wall, jumping from the top of his fence to the narrow south path, at about 10:51, 10:52 PM.

After Shively encountered and identified Simpson at the intersection of San Vicente and Bundy, Simpson continued to speed back home, parked his Bronco, quickly wiped up any blood he saw on the Bronco center console, and then walked along his neighbors property to his fence behind Kaelin's room.

A couple of minutes before Shively encountered Simpson, Heidstra saw a white jeep like vehicle (Simpson's Bronco) speed away form Bundy.

About five minuets before that Heidstra heard two male voices yelling at each other coming from Nicole's condo (Ron had arrived at Bundy and yelled at Simpson. Simpson yelled back) Heidstra said he then heard Nicole's front gate slam. Heidstra never said he heard the gate slammed SHUT. That's only something you made up because you can't comprehend the reality that a metal gate that is slammed hard may not latch and bounce back open.

bobaugust

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust

*Snipped*

(Ron had arrived at Bundy and yelled at Simpson. Simpson yelled back)

Heidstra said he then heard Nicole's front gate slam. Heidstra never said he heard the gate slammed SHUT. That's only something you made up because you can't comprehend the reality that a metal gate that is slammed hard may not latch and bounce back open.

bobaugust


August,

The more you argue this, the more ridiculous you sound...

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



August,

The more you argue this, the more ridiculous you sound...



nettathirty, that's funny. It may sound ridiculous to you but it doesn't sound ridiculous to any person who is familiar with metal gates. People like Judge Ito and Carl Douglas.

I'm sorry to say that your limited life experience handicaps your ability to comprehend realities that people with greater life experience than you understand perfectly.

bobaugust

[limakey]

Mr. August,

What time did Dr. Ameli call Nicole? When was the last time Nicole saw Dr. Ameli?

What did Dr. Ameli know about Nicole's plans that night where she felt the need to call her? Why make the suggestion to have someone stay with her that night, of all nights?

And when did Dr. Ameli last see Ron Goldman, did she try to call him that night? And if she did, why?

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



August,

Using the headline "New Evidence" to describe some 3 years undeveloped pictures is insulting.. If you believe for 1 second that these guys didn't know long before the Criminal Trial stated, what the content of that film was, you are SERIOUSLY IN DENIAL..

The Prosecution knew as well, everything was price to sell to the HIGHEST bidders.. For example, not implying anything about the Browns, just as a reference.. They sold Nicole's wedding photos among other things. You cannot convince me these photographers cared more for Nicole's memory than her own family..

That last part was not an attack on the Brown family or their character.. I merely used them and that act as an example to drive my point home!



nettathirty, you're confused again.

Yes the over thirty photographs were new evidence presented in the civil trial that were not known at the time of the criminal trial.

If you had read Flammer's testimony in the civil trial you would know that your comments have no basis in fact. You have a great track record, nettathirty, of offering ridiculous false opinions about things you know nothing about.

Good job.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by limakey
Mr. August,

What time did Dr. Ameli call Nicole? When was the last time Nicole saw Dr. Ameli?

What did Dr. Ameli know about Nicole's plans that night where she felt the need to call her? Why make the suggestion to have someone stay with her that night, of all nights?

And when did Dr. Ameli last see Ron Goldman, did she try to call him that night? And if she did, why?



limakey, why are you asking me these questions about Dr. Ameli? You're the one who made these claims not me, it's up to you to support them.

The only thing I know about Dr. Ameli is what Petrocelli wrote in his book based on what she told him. She said she had treated Ron Goldman beginning in October 1993 and into 1994. Ron had introduced Ameli to Nicole whom she saw more regularly up to and including three days before she died. She gave Petrocelli several documents including her notes and bills. Most of the notes were pertaining to Simpson and what he did and said to her.

Selected portions of what Petrocelli wrote,
"I had never heard of Dr. Ameli, but when we began investigating we found the LAPD had a large file on her. She had not come forward in the criminal trial until three months after the murders, September 19994, when she reported a break in at her office. The police arrived to find file drawers open, papers strewn around, a real mess - and some notes from her files on Ron and Nicole lying on the floor. At that point, although she claims she was coerced into revealing this, she told the police someone was trying to shut her up because she had evidence that would bury Simpson.

The police looked into Dr. Ameli's information long and hard and concluded that there was just wasn't enough for them to feel comfortable with. There was a sense that the break in might have been staged. When they basically wrote her off, she disappeared from the landscape.

Nor did she level with us at first.. When we met with her in February and asked to be told everything, she gave us some information; when we met with her a second time we were presented with more information, new information began to emerge, new notes she hadn't mentioned at our first meeting.

As our meetings with Dr. Ameli and her witnesses increased in frequency, so did her story increase in drama. The kicker came when she told us for the first time that she had called Nicole form a pay phone at a Persian restaurant on Santa Monica Boulevard on the night of the murders. She knew Nicole had been going to see Sydney dance, she said, and that Simpson might be there. According to Ameli, she told Nicole, "I was worried about you. How did your recital and dance go with the family?" Nicole told her, "I told him to 'f' off today" -- the doctor was not a natural user of profanity -- "and I am relieved. I am happy on one hand, but I'm frightened. He's not going to let me get away with it."

If she had presented this story to us at our first meeting, I don't know how I would have reacted. To hear such important evidence so late in the game was too much to accept.

To expose that she was a fraud, the defense subpoenaed her for deposition. Ameli needed legal representation, and I referred her to Peter Lesser, an attorney I respected. I asked him to do his own investigation and decide for himself if she was real or not. The last thing I wanted was to vouch for a witness who was not genuine.

Lesser got back to me. "Dan," he said, "I have now verified this whole story with at least eight people."

My ultimate decision wa not to use her at trial. Neither the Goldman's nor the Brown's believed her, there was no evidence of payment, but there was nothing about her story I could flatly contradict - nothing I knew was absolutely false - only the way it was delivered was completely incredible. Plus, even if Dr. Ameli were telling the truth about everything, as devastating as this evidence was, she would have been subjected to three or four days of cross-examination. Baker would have hammered her. She didn't give the police her information immediately, she didn't tell anybody immediately; then there was the question of where the break in was staged, and the fact that her story came out in evolutionary stages.

Whether or not she was telling the truth, we could not allow her testimony to turn the proceedings into the trial of Jenniefer Ameli."

bobaugust

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust



. Estimated times are not real times and do not tell us when an event actually happened, only approximately when it happened.

The order events happened in tell us what Simpson did that night.

bobaugust


August,

Based on this logic, Heidstra timeline can NOT be trusted..

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



August,

Based on this logic, Heidstra timeline can NOT be trusted.. Oh geez! Heidstra's timeline is corroborated by other testimony and evidence.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



August,

Based on this logic, Heidstra timeline can NOT be trusted..


nettathirty, wrong. It seems you're confused again.

Estimated times do not contradict what witnesses saw and heard. Estimated times only tell us approximately when events happened. Some estimated times may be closer to actual real times than others but that's not the point.

To say something could not happen based only on an estimated time using minutes, like you've tried to do, is not a credible or relevant argument in a situation like this where all the events happened in such a short period of time.

bobaugust

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust

*Snipped*

To say something could not happen based only on an estimated time using minutes, like you've tried to do, is not a credible or relevant argument in a situation like this where all the events happened in such a short period of time.

bobaugust

August,

I'm talking about when he heard and saw what he claimed..

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Oh geez! Heidstra's timeline is corroborated by other testimony and evidence.


fbg,

Heidstra testimony is corroborated by what evidence, and the testimony in question deals with "ESTIMATED TIMES", not real times.. So even though he my have heard and saw what he claim, it's quite possible the time in which the event took place my differ considerably..

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



fbg,

Heidstra testimony is corroborated by what evidence, and the testimony in question deals with "ESTIMATED TIMES", not real times.. So even though he my have heard and saw what he claim, it's quite possible the time in which the event took place my differ considerably.. Anything is possible EXCEPT Orenthal being innocent of the murders. Your fantasy about Orenthal NOT murdering Nicole and Ron is just that -- fantasy. You have refused to acknowledge the proof of this case and it is making you appear to be quite ignorant of the facts.

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Anything is possible EXCEPT Orenthal being innocent of the murders. Your fantasy about Orenthal NOT murdering Nicole and Ron is just that -- fantasy. You have refused to acknowledge the proof of this case and it is making you appear to be quite ignorant of the facts.



fbg,

What evidence supports Heidstra testimony?
I said there was a bloody BM shoe print?
I said OJ bled beside his bloody shoe print!
I even said OJ owned the gloves, at Bundy!

What more do you want, what else do you want from me?

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



fbg,

Heidstra testimony is corroborated by what evidence, and the testimony in question deals with "ESTIMATED TIMES", not real times.. So even though he my have heard and saw what he claim, it's quite possible the time in which the event took place my differ considerably..


nettathirty, no you're wrong.

The fact is that Heidstra's estimated times were not to the minute. He estimated time ranges.

The first event in the sequence of events that establish the time line is when Nicole's Akita started it's unusual non stop barking. Heidstra estimated the time that happened at about 10:30, 10:35.

Mandel and Aaronson walked by Nicole's condo shortly before 10:30 and there was no dog, and no barking. Denise Pilnak and Judy Telander were outside just down the street from Nicole's condo before 10:30 and they never heard any barking. After Telander left, Pilnak went back into her house and called her mother. Her telephone records show that call ended at 10:28. After hanging up the phone Pilnak went to her bathroom. She said when she was drying her hands she heard a dog start to bark. She said she retimed those activities and believes the dog started barking at about 10:33 or between 10:30 and 10:35.

bobaugust

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust

*Snipped*

Heidstra estimated the time that happened at about 10:30, 10:35.


bobaugust


August,

That was Heidstra estimated Civil Trial timeline, in the Criminal Trial he said it was 10:40, 10:45..

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



August,

That was Heidstra estimated Civil Trial timeline, in the Criminal Trial he said it was 10:40, 10:45..



nettathirty, that's funny. Try reading all of Heidstra's criminal trial testimony I posted for you and see for yourself how long he said it took him after hearing the gate slam to walk to Dorothy Street before he saw the white jeep like vehicle. Not his time estimate but the amount of time it took him.

That's why I posted the civil trial testimony because Petrocelli asked Heidstra more specific questions about that.

It was about five minutes, not seconds like you claimed

Once again it seems you can't admit to being wrong.

Good job, nettathirty

bobaugust

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust

*Snipped*

Once again it seems you can't admit to being wrong.

Good job, nettathirty

bobaugust


August,

I said 10:40, 10:45 wouldn't that be a 5 minute difference!

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



August,

I said 10:40, 10:45 wouldn't that be a 5 minute difference!



nettathirty, yes 10:45 would be a five minute difference between when Heidstra said he heard the gate slam and when he saw the white jeep like vehicle. I'm glad that you now realize that you were mistaken when you previously said that it was only seconds. And you were also mistaken when you said that Heidstra's civil trial testimony was different than his criminal trial testimony.

It seems you haven't the integrity to actually admit to either of these false claims you made, so I said it for you.

bobaugust

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust




nettathirty, yes 10:45 would be a five minute difference between when Heidstra said he heard the gate slam and when he saw the white jeep like vehicle. I'm glad that you now realize that you were mistaken when you previously said that it was only seconds. And you were also mistaken when you said that Heidstra's civil trial testimony was different than his criminal trial testimony.

It seems you haven't the integrity to actually admit to either of these false claims you made, so I said it for you.

bobaugust


August,

In your ear, the point is estimated times.. So, even though Petrocelli coached Heidstra based on his Criminal Trial testimony, and your integrity won't allow you to admit that.. Heidstra based on your own logic could still be off in his times of 3 minutes and even 4mins 55sec ....

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



August,

In your ear, the point is estimated times.. So, even though Petrocelli coached Heidstra based on his Criminal Trial testimony, and your integrity won't allow you to admit that.. Heidstra based on your own logic could still be off in his times of 3 minutes and even 4mins 55sec ....


nettathirty, you're the one who claimed Heidstra testified that he saw the white jeep like vehicle seconds after he heard the gate slam. Your claim was proven wrong.

You're the one who claimed that Heidstra's civil trial testimony was different then his criminal trial testimony. Your claim was proven wrong.

And you still haven't admitted you were wrong about these proven wrong claims. Is it that hard for you to admit to your mistakes?

Did Petrocelli interview Heidstra before Heidstra testified in the civil trial? Of course. Did Petrocelli coach Heidstra to say something different than what he testified to in the criminal trial? Of course not. He didn't have to. Petrocelli called Heidstra as his witness based on what Heidstra testified to in the criminal trial and Heidstra testified to the same facts in the civil trial.

I said that estimated times were not real times. The could be minutes off or they could be only seconds off. The first event in the time line is when Heidstra heard Nicole's dog start to bark. Heidstra estimated that time as about 10;30, 10:35. Heidstra's time estimate was supported by Denise Pilnak's testimony as to the time she estimated she heard the dog start to bark. Between 10:30 and 10:35. Pilnak's time estimate was supported by her telephone records.

bobaugust

[jotun]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8
Since the Timeline that was posted by Wukong so many months ago has been deleted, I found this under "The OJ Simpson Murder Case." How accurate it is, is anybody's guess. Maybe some of our more illustrious posters can decipher what is accurate and what is not.

http://www.courttv.com/casefiles/simpson/new_docs/timeline.html

Think this is what
Wukong posted:

http://www.
geocities.com/
CapitolHill/1472/
analysis.html

an another from the same site:

http://members.
fortunecity.com/
schreck/time0002.
html

If it doesn't work as per usual for me
here.Could someone
fix it??
jotun

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva


:rolleyes: :D

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by jotun


Think this is what
Wukong posted:

http://www.
geocities.com/
CapitolHill/1472/
analysis.html

<snipped>

If it doesn't work as per usual for me
here.Could someone
fix it??
jotun

Sorry, you think wrong. The above is NOT the timeline that Wukong posted. It was posted on the original OJ Simpson Board that was deleted many, many, many months ago. Wukong worked long and hard on this timeline, only to have it deleted without so much as a "How Do You Do?"

You need to fix your links yourself, or learn how. We do not live on these Boards 24/7 to be at your beck and call that's for sure!

JMO and MOO!!

[jotun]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8


Sorry, you think wrong. The above is NOT the timeline that Wukong posted.

You need to fix your links yourself, or learn how. We do not live on these Boards 24/7 to be at your beck and call that's for sure!

JMO and MOO!!

All

Was just trying to share 2 excellent links.

jotun

[cami]

Originally posted by jotun


Think this is what
Wukong posted:

http://wwwgeocities.com/CapitolHill/1472/analysis.html

an another from the same site:

http://members.fortunecity.com/schreck/time0002.html

If it doesn't work as per usual for me
here.Could someone
fix it??
jotun


http://wwwgeocities.com/CapitolHill/1472/analysis.html

http://members.fortunecity.com/schreck/time0002.html

[martin II]

Originally posted by nettathirty



August,

The more you argue this, the more ridiculous you sound...

nette

bob wishes the gate did not slam closed so he can try to have a excuse of how the dog got out. it is really funny.
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


nette

bob wishes the gate did not slam closed so he can try to have a excuse of how the dog got out. it is really funny.
martin II how did the dog get out?

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
how did the dog get out?


fbg,

The real question is, when did the dog come outside the condo?

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


nette

bob wishes the gate did not slam closed so he can try to have a excuse of how the dog got out. it is really funny.
martin II



martin II, no, what's funny is you're still trying talk about things you don't know anything about.

I never said the dog went out the gate after Heidstra heard the gate slam. The fact is that Heidstra testified he heard the Akita start to bark when the dog was already in the street about five minutes or so before he heard the gate slam.

bobaugust

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



fbg,

The real question is, when did the dog come outside the condo? Why would that be the question? Obviously the dog was outside in time to witness the attack on Nicole - hence he started barking.

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Why would that be the question? Obviously the dog was outside in time to witness the attack on Nicole - hence he started barking.


fbg,

How can that be, when you just as many witnesses claiming the barking started shortly before 10:15p, while some believe it was shortly after 10:03p...

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



fbg,

How can that be, when you just as many witnesses claiming the barking started shortly before 10:15p, while some believe it was shortly after 10:03p... You are wrong.

[martin II]

fbg

The dog did not have to witness the attack by the killers to cause him to bark. The dog could have come out of the house after the killers left, saw Nicole's body (not responding) stood or sat next to her for a moment and went out the front gate to the street. imo
MartinII

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II
fbg

The dog did not have to witness the attack by the killers to cause him to bark. The dog could have come out of the house after the killers left, saw Nicole's body (not responding) stood or sat next to her for a moment and went out the front gate to the street. imo
MartinII So you believe Nicole and Ron laid dead with blood flowing down the sidewalk and the gate open and no one saw them or noticed anything?

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust




martin II, no, what's funny is you're still trying talk about things you don't know anything about.

I never said the dog went out the gate after Heidstra heard the gate slam. The fact is that Heidstra testified he heard the Akita start to bark when the dog was already in the street about five minutes or so before he heard the gate slam.

bobaugust

bob
Heidstra testified that he never saw the dog in the street, just heard him at about 10:35 and that he THOUGHT the sound came from bundy. Heidstra said he heard a gate slam at about 10:40.
he did not know if the gate slammed and locked or slammed and remained unlocked/open and neither do you.imo
If Heidstras testimony is correct then the dog was in the street barking before someone slammed the gate and the hey hey was heard.imo
Martin II
Martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
So you believe Nicole and Ron laid dead with blood flowing down the sidewalk and the gate open and no one saw them or noticed anything?

fbg
are you sure that blood was FLOWING down the SIDEWAk or was it on the tiles inside the walkway going to the front door when the bodies were found?
martin II

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by martin II
If Heidstras testimony is correct then the dog was in the street barking before someone slammed the gate and the hey hey was heard.Then would you think it logical that the dog was barking with regard to the attack on Nicole?

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
are you sure that blood was FLOWING down the SIDEWAk or was it on the tiles inside the walkway going to the front door when the bodies were found?
martin II Hmmm, I believe the testimony was that the blood was 'like a river' toward the sidewalk.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
So you believe Nicole and Ron laid dead with blood flowing down the sidewalk and the gate open and no one saw them or noticed anything?

no

i believe that the dog did not have to witness the killings to start barking. i believe the dog started barking after he came from the house and saw the bodies imo
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Hmmm, I believe the testimony was that the blood was 'like a river' toward the sidewalk.

fbg
i was responding to your statement "blood flowing down the sidewalk" which is not true.

look at the pictures on wagner and sons and you will see where pools of blood were and where the blood flowed from/to and where prints were. imo
Martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


no

i believe that the dog did not have to witness the killings to start barking. i believe the dog started barking after he came from the house and saw the bodies imo
martin II Then that would mean that the dog was barking before the couple walked down the street, the neighbor walked her friend to her car and/or Heidstra began his walk. So what time do you believe the murders occurred?

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
i was responding to your statement "blood flowing down the sidewalk" which is not true.

look at the pictures on wagner and sons and you will see where pools of blood were and where the blood flowed from/to and where prints were. imo
Martin II The pictures show Nicole's body up by the front steps and the blood flow going toward the front sidewalk.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snipped*Then would you think it logical that the dog was barking with regard to the attack on Nicole?

fbg

i think the dog started barking when he came out and found Nicole on the ground not responding to him. however this indicated that the dog found Nicole(sometine before 10:35) went to the street where Heidstra thought the dog was barking at about 10:35 and that the person that slammed the gate and yelled hey hey hey did not arrive until about 10:40 (if this was ron
he was not dead at 10:40) imo
Martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
The pictures show Nicole's body up by the front steps and the blood flow going toward the front sidewalk.

fbg

blood flowing on the tiles between nicoles body and the gate is quite different from blood flowing 'on the sidewalk" as you stated.. remember the gate was not AT the sidewalk it is several feet from the sidewalk.
Martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Then that would mean that the dog was barking before the couple walked down the street, the neighbor walked her friend to her car and/or Heidstra began his walk. So what time do you believe the murders occurred?

fbg
no it does not mean that.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
no it does not mean that.
martin II

fbg

do you remember what time the couple walk past Nicoles condo walkway?
martin II

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by martin II
i think the dog started barking when he came out and found Nicole on the ground not responding to him. however this indicated that the dog found Nicole(sometine before 10:35) went to the street where Heidstra thought the dog was barking at about 10:35 and that the person that slammed the gate and yelled hey hey hey did not arrive until about 10:40 (if this was ron
he was not dead at 10:40) June 12, 1994 between 10:15 and 10:30 P.M. Nicole's neighborhood was quite. Danny Mandel and Ellen Aaronson walked past Nicole's condo. Denise Pilnak was outside her house with Judy Telander. Francesca Harman drove past Nicole's condo.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snipped* June 12, 1994 between 10:15 and 10:30 P.M. Nicole's neighborhood was quite. Danny Mandel and Ellen Aaronson walked past Nicole's condo. Denise Pilnak was outside her house with Judy Telander. Francesca Harman drove past Nicole's condo.

thanks
so this means that the dog started barking some time after 10:30
if he was barking because of the dead bodies and IF these witnesses times are correct. if the person that slammed the gate was ron, then he did not arrive until about 10;40 according to Heidstra imo
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II
blood flowing on the tiles between nicoles body and the gate is quite different from blood flowing 'on the sidewalk" as you stated.. remember the gate was not AT the sidewalk it is several feet from the sidewalk.
Darden's book, p. 280+12, shows the street end of the front walk from the parkway. A streak of blood that overflowed the walk and went onto the sidewalk is obvious, though it is broken, apparently after it was dry, by someone passing on the sidewalk. The many dog paw prints on the sidewalk and Nicole's front walk are conspicuous, and there appear to be a couple of smears on both surfaces, though the cause is uncertain. (Boztepe and his wife went a little way up the walk when they discovered the body, and they may have stepped in, and smeared, wet blood.)

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II
thanks . . .so this means that the dog started barking some time after 10:30 if he was barking because of the dead bodies and IF these witnesses times are correct. if the person that slammed the gate was ron, then he did not arrive until about 10;40 according to Heidstra imoWhich means the dog was barking before the murders occurred? Your scenario wouldn't work since it is undisputed that Nicole was murdered after Ron.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Which means the dog was barking before the murders occurred? Your scenario wouldn't work since it is undisputed that Nicole was murdered after Ron.


fbg

my statement does not mean in any way that the dog was barking before any murder.

i specifically said the dog came out of the house and found Nicole dead next to the steps of her condo.

Again, there was no "blood flowing on the sidewalk" as you stated in front of nicoles condo.imo
Martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II
my statement does not mean in any way that the dog was barking before any murder.

i specifically said the dog came out of the house and found Nicole dead next to the steps of her condo.

Again, there was no "blood flowing on the sidewalk" as you stated in front of nicoles condo. So Nicole and Ron were dead before the dog began barking?

From Wagner's site (and we know you like Wagner): "Darden's book, p. 280+12, shows the street end of the front walk from the parkway. A streak of blood that overflowed the walk and went onto the sidewalk is obvious, though it is broken, apparently after it was dry, by someone passing on the sidewalk. The many dog paw prints on the sidewalk and Nicole's front walk are conspicuous, and there appear to be a couple of smears on both surfaces, though the cause is uncertain. (Boztepe and his wife went a little way up the walk when they discovered the body, and they may have stepped in, and smeared, wet blood.)"

[martin II]

fbg
IF the dog was barking in the street at 10:35 because he had found nicole dead at the steps and if ron arrived at 10:40 and slammed the gate when he was attacked by the killers then maby
nicole was killed some time before 10:35 and ron was not killed until after 10:40 if heidstras times are correct

so say nicole was attacked and killed at 10:30 and the dog walks up the block where heidstra heard him at 10:35 and ron arrived at 10:40 this means that the killers were at the murder scene for about ten minutes before ron was attacked.imo
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II
fbg
IF the dog was barking in the street at 10:35 because he had found nicole dead at the steps and if ron arrived at 10:40 and slammed the gate when he was attacked by the killers then maby
nicole was killed some time before 10:35 and ron was not killed until after 10:40 if heidstras times are correct

so say nicole was attacked and killed at 10:30 and the dog walks up the block where heidstra heard him at 10:35 and ron arrived at 10:40 this means that the killers were at the murder scene for about ten minutes before ron was attacked.imo
martin II It was undisputed that Nicole was murdered after Ron.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Which means the dog was barking before the murders occurred? Your scenario wouldn't work since it is undisputed that Nicole was murdered after Ron.

fbg
undisputed?

ron did not arrive until 10:40 according to Heidstra so you are saying ron was killed after 10:40 and nicole was killed after that?
i thought it was believed that ron interupted the killer killing nicole.

if nicole was killed AFTER ron and ron arrived at 10:40 what was the dog in the street barking for at 10:35?

martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


bob
Heidstra testified that he never saw the dog in the street, just heard him at about 10:35 and that he THOUGHT the sound came from bundy.

Martin II


martin II,

October 25, 1996 Robert Heidstra

Q. Now, the Akita that you started to hear barking like crazy, did you recognize that to be Nicole's?
A. Yeah, immediately. There was no other dog like that in that stretch of the street.
Q. Okay.
A. I recognize the barking.
Q. When you heard the dog barking like crazy, what did you do?
A. I was immediately alerted, because it's a big dog and I didn't want any fight with any dogs or something. He sounded like he was on the street. So I stopped immediately and turned around, and said we can't go further.
Q. When you heard the dog barking?
A. Yeah.
Q. Nicole's Akita barking, you -- from the sounds of the barking, you thought it was in the street and not behind the gate?
A. Yeah. It sounds like so close, so close.
Q. Okay. And you did not want to go by the house?
A. No, because I didn't want to risk for my dogs to have a fight or anything.

bobaugust

[limakey]

Martin,

Here is some thing you might be interested in, the difference in dog's barking. In the book, "Killing Time", it has the dog barking like crazy but it apparently changes to a wail when he realizes that Nicole is dead.

Another point about the dog and the timeline--what time did the cops log in their call regarding their encounter with Steven Swab?

Why didn't they call the animal shelter like they said they would?

Why did the dog refuse to move from the corner when Steven tried to get him to lead him home, but nearly dragged the other couple to the bodies?

Also, the dog stopping and barking at the houses as he is following Steven Swab?

As for Ron Goldman---I would love to know what time the message was left by Stewart Tanner. I would love to know what else was on his answering machine tape. The cops thought it was relevant to take---but never gave it back to the Goldmans' until much later.

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
It was undisputed that Nicole was murdered after Ron.



fbg,

You mean speculated, nothing was ever undisputed... The only explanation for thinking Nicole was the last to be killed, was the fact that her feet didn't have blood on them.. (that's it)

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by socaldiva


Huh? Her feet have nothing to do with it & what you've posted makes no sense to me :confused:


Socal

Please tell us, why it is believed Nicole was killed second?

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Socal

Please tell us, why it is believed Nicole was killed second? IIRC, it was believed that had Orenthal attacked Ron first, Nicole would have had the opportunity to scream and/or run away; also drops of Ron's blood found on Nicole.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
IIRC, it was believed that had Orenthal attacked Ron first, Nicole would have had the opportunity to scream and/or run away; also drops of Ron's blood found on Nicole.

fbg
again ron arrived at 10:40 pm and was attacked. was nicole killed sometime after 10:40pm
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
again ron arrived at 10:40 pm and was attacked. was nicole killed sometime after 10:40pm
martin II Approximately 10:30, 10:35: Robert Heidstra heard Nicole's dog barking.

Approximately 10:40: Heidstra heard Goldman arrive at Nicole's condo.

Approximately 10:45: Heidstra saw Simpson's Bronco speed away from the crime scene.

**So the answer to your question would be 'yes' -- sometime in that 3-4 minute timeframe.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Approximately 10:30, 10:35: Robert Heidstra heard Nicole's dog barking.

Approximately 10:40: Heidstra heard Goldman arrive at Nicole's condo.

Approximately 10:45: Heidstra saw Simpson's Bronco speed away from the crime scene.

**So the answer to your question would be 'yes' -- sometime in that 3-4 minute timeframe.

fbg
so oj stabs/cuts ron 30-- times or so then nicole 6-7 times comes back to ron for the testing wounds to make it a total of 40 wounds/cuts. walks towards the rear gate, backtracks a few steps, walks out the back gate and into the bronco and drives away where you belive heidestra saw him at bundy and dorothy at 10:45. all in this as you say 3-4 minute time.

martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
so oj stabs/cuts ron 30-- times or so then nicole 6-7 times comes back to ron for the testing wounds to make it a total of 40 wounds/cuts. walks towards the rear gate, backtracks a few steps, walks out the back gate and into the bronco and drives away where you belive heidestra saw him at bundy and dorothy at 10:45. all in this as you say 3-4 minute time.

martin II Yep except I don't know about the exact number of wounds suffered by Nicole and Ron.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Yep except I don't know about the exact number of wounds suffered by Nicole and Ron.

fbg

how do you know that the hey hey hey heidstra thinks he heard at about 10:40 was spoken by ron.?
martin II

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by martin II
how do you know that the hey hey hey heidstra thinks he heard at about 10:40 was spoken by ron.? I don't "know" that it was Ron but using my common sense tells me that if I put everything else in its place (Orenthal last seen by Kato, Orenthal's hair, blood, pigeon-toed size 12 Bruno Magli footprints, and fibers at the murder scene, the barking dog, Orenthal's near wreck with Shively, Orenthal being seen by Parks returning to Rockingham, fibers and Orenthal's blood at Rockingham) tells me that Orenthal James Simpson murdered Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snipped* I don't "know" that it was Ron but using my common sense tells me that if I put everything else in its place (Orenthal last seen by Kato, Orenthal's hair, blood, pigeon-toed size 12 Bruno Magli footprints, and fibers at the murder scene, the barking dog, Orenthal's near wreck with Shively, Orenthal being seen by Parks returning to Rockingham, fibers and Orenthal's blood at Rockingham) tells me that Orenthal James Simpson murdered Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman.

fbg.

now that is really funny
using your common sense.
this must mean that you are willing to ignore all the problems in the collection, testing by lapd and the lies of the prosecutions witnesses.
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg.

now that is really funny
using your common sense.
this must mean that you are willing to ignore all the problems in the collection, testing by lapd and the lies of the prosecutions witnesses.
martin II It's not a matter of ignoring screw-ups and missteps. But the bottom line is that nothing done by LAPD was going to change the DNA found at the scene. No one could have planted Orenthal's blood and pigeon-toed size 12 footprints at the scene. In the twelve years since the murder, there has not been one iota of credible evidence that anyone else was the murderer other than Orenthal.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
It's not a matter of ignoring screw-ups and missteps. But the bottom line is that nothing done by LAPD was going to change the DNA found at the scene. No one could have planted Orenthal's blood and pigeon-toed size 12 footprints at the scene. In the twelve years since the murder, there has not been one iota of credible evidence that anyone else was the murderer other than Orenthal.

fbg
do you totally discount wagner and others that oj was at the murder scene after the murders?
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
do you totally discount wagner and others that oj was at the murder scene after the murders?
martin II Oh I believe Orenthal was at the murder scene before, during and after the murders. I discount Wagner's theory of multiple killers.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Oh I believe Orenthal was at the murder scene before, during and after the murders. I discount Wagner's theory of multiple killers.

fbg
well then i will assume that your investigation of the case was superior to wagners detail study and this is one of the reasons you discount all of his theories.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Approximately 10:30, 10:35: Robert Heidstra heard Nicole's dog barking.

Approximately 10:40: Heidstra heard Goldman arrive at Nicole's condo.

Approximately 10:45: Heidstra saw Simpson's Bronco speed away from the crime scene.

**So the answer to your question would be 'yes' -- sometime in that 3-4 minute timeframe.

fbg
if the dog was wailing because he had found nicole dead and

nicole was killed after ron was killed after 10:40 pm

what was the dog barking for at bundy and gorham at 10:30 -10:35pm?
nicole was not dead then according to you.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
It's not a matter of ignoring screw-ups and missteps. But the bottom line is that nothing done by LAPD was going to change the DNA found at the scene. No one could have planted Orenthal's blood and pigeon-toed size 12 footprints at the scene. In the twelve years since the murder, there has not been one iota of credible evidence that anyone else was the murderer other than Orenthal.

As Mr Baker said
"we do not know if the blood collected on the ground is the same blood tested in the labs"

martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


As Mr Baker said
"we do not know if the blood collected on the ground is the same blood tested in the labs"

martin II Why would all the people involved in the collection and testing have lied about it? There were three independent labs that tested the blood and they all came to the same conclusion: the blood belonged to Orenthal. The defense never questioned that it was Orenthal's blood because they couldn't.

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
if the dog was wailing because he had found nicole dead and

nicole was killed after ron was killed after 10:40 pm

what was the dog barking for at bundy and gorham at 10:30 -10:35pm?
nicole was not dead then according to you.
martin II My contention is the dog started barking during the initial attack on Nicole by Orenthal.

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
well then i will assume that your investigation of the case was superior to wagners detail study and this is one of the reasons you discount all of his theories.
martin II Wagner's theory of multiple killers is not supported by the evidence.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
My contention is the dog started barking during the initial attack on Nicole by Orenthal.

fbg

so you do not belive that Heidstra heard the dog barking at 10:35 at Bundy near Gorham.

you cannot have it both ways.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Why would all the people involved in the collection and testing have lied about it? There were three independent labs that tested the blood and they all came to the same conclusion: the blood belonged to Orenthal. The defense never questioned that it was Orenthal's blood because they couldn't.

fbg

you are missing Mr Bakers point

the dna labs only tested the samples given them by lapd they did no collecting and packaging of samples.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg

so you do not belive that Heidstra heard the dog barking at 10:35 at Bundy near Gorham.

you cannot have it both ways.
martin II

fbg

i thought you should see your previous statement about Heidstras timeline.

seems like you are saying two opposite things.

martin II


Originally posted by nettathirty



August,

Based on this logic, Heidstra timeline can NOT be trusted..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh geez! Heidstra's timeline is corroborated by other testimony and evidence.

[martin II]

fbg
summary of your post on this issue.



Your post to nette
Oh geez! Heidstra's timeline is corroborated by other testimony and evidence.

Heidstra heard the dog at 10:35
-----------
Originally posted by fbgweezer
My contention is the dog started barking during the initial attack on Nicole by Orenthal.

This would be after 10:40


________________________________________
Fbg
Your post
It was undisputed that Nicole was murdered after Ron.

This would have to be after 10:40pm
-----------------
Is this a contradiction or not. i don't think you have a clue.
Martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II

Is this a contradiction or not. i don't think you have a clue.
Martin II


martin II, there is no contradiction.

The Akita started it's barking when Simpson first encountered Nicole shortly after 10:30.
In that confrontation the evidence is that Nicole was knocked unconscious.
Ron Goldman arrived a few or so minutes after the dog started it's barking when Heidstra heard the two male voices coming from Nicole's condo and then Heidstra heard Nicole's front gate slam.
Simpson attacked and killed Ron
Simpson then returned to his unconscious exwife and cut her throat.
Simpson then left Bundy and was seen by Heidstra when he saw a white Jeep like vehicle speed away from Bundy.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, there is no contradiction.

The Akita started it's barking when Simpson first encountered Nicole shortly after 10:30.
In that confrontation the evidence is that Nicole was knocked unconscious.
Ron Goldman arrived a few or so minutes after the dog started it's barking when Heidstra heard the two male voices coming from Nicole's condo and then Heidstra heard Nicole's front gate slam.
Simpson attacked and killed Ron
Simpson then returned to his unconscious exwife and cut her throat.
Simpson then left Bundy and was seen by Heidstra when he saw a white Jeep like vehicle speed away from Bundy.

bobaugust

BOB

1.MY POST WAS ADDRESSED TO FBG.

2. FBG Said the dog started barking when nicole was attacked.

3. Then fbg says nicole was attacked after ron was attacked
which would have been some time after 10:40 (if heidstra is
correct)

4. the dog was barking at 10:35 up the street from nicoles condo.

5. so if the dog was barking when nicole was attacked then she was attacked before 10:35 imo

martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


BOB

1.MY POST WAS ADDRESSED TO FBG.

2. FBG Said the dog started barking when nicole was attacked.

3. Then fbg says nicole was attacked after ron was attacked
which would have been some time after 10:40 (if heidstra is
correct)

4. the dog was barking at 10:35 up the street from nicoles condo.

5. so if the dog was barking when nicole was attacked then she was attacked before 10:35 imo

martin II Probably a poor choice of words on my part. My theory is the dog began barking when Orenthal and Nicole had the first encounter and it is believed Nicole was knocked unconcious. Expert testimony is that Ron was murdered before Nicole.

Heidstra says the dog was 'in the street' barking -- you are incorrect in stating that he 'was up the street @ 10:35'

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Probably a poor choice of words on my part. My theory is the dog began barking when Orenthal and Nicole had the first encounter and it is believed Nicole was knocked unconcious. Expert testimony is that Ron was murdered before Nicole.

Heidstra says the dog was 'in the street' barking -- you are incorrect in stating that he 'was up the street @ 10:35'

fbg
heidstra was very near to Bundy and Gorham he said the dog sound was comming from bundy near where he was.

so exactly what time was it when you believe oj and nicole had the first encounter. was it before 10:35?

martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
heidstra was very near to Bundy and Gorham he said the dog sound was comming from bundy near where he was.

so exactly what time was it when you believe oj and nicole had the first encounter. was it before 10:35?

martin II I believe you are still incorrect -- Heidstra said when he could hear the dog barking, it sounded like it was out IN the street.

Approximately 10:30, 10:35: Robert Heidstra heard Nicole's dog barking.

Approximately 10:40: Heidstra heard Goldman arrive at Nicole's condo.

Approximately 10:45: Heidstra saw Simpson's Bronco speed away from the crime scene.

Like I said before, Nicole was murdered between 1030 - 1045

[martin II]

fbg

this is what heidstra said about where the dog was on bundy at 10:35 when he was at bundy and gorham "he sounded very close"


"MR. HEIDSTRA: At that point I stopped immediately with my dogs, like I said, because I was afraid for my dogs, for the Akita. He sounded panicking and he sounded very close on the street almost, so I turned around with my dogs and says we can't go further any more so I--so I turned around."
-----------
i see you cannot be specific about the time nicole was first attacked because if it was after ron was killed, after 10:40 then
there would be no reason for the dog to be barking because nicole had been attacked at 10:35.

heidstra said it was 10:35 when the dog first started barking so if he was barking because of nicole situation then nicole must have been attacked just before 10:35. and could not have been attacked and killed after 10:40 UNLESS you are willing to suggest that it took the killer(s) more than 10 minutes to kill both. or that heidstras time is wrong. imo
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
I believe you are still incorrect -- Heidstra said when he could hear the dog barking, it sounded like it was out IN the street.

Approximately 10:30, 10:35: Robert Heidstra heard Nicole's dog barking.

Approximately 10:40: Heidstra heard Goldman arrive at Nicole's condo.

Approximately 10:45: Heidstra saw Simpson's Bronco speed away from the crime scene.

Like I said before, Nicole was murdered between 1030 - 1045

fbg
can you be more specific when she was murdered.
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
can you be more specific when she was murdered.
martin II Not unless you think I'm Orenthal! :D

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Not unless you think I'm Orenthal! :D

fbg
i do see you are still trying to play with words and now trying to be a comic.

you are clueless imo
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Not unless you think I'm Orenthal! :D

fbg
if you were oj you would not have a clue either.
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
can you be more specific when she was murdered.
martin II


martin II, nobody knows exactly what happened at Bundy except for the three people who were there. Two of them are dead and the third, Simpson isn't talking.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, nobody knows exactly what happened at Bundy except for the three people who were there. Two of them are dead and the third, Simpson isn't talking.

bobaugust

bob
does this mean that you will now stop TELLING posters what happened???
MARTIN ii

[martin II]

fbg

based on your post then 15 minutes passed from the time nicole was attacked and finally killed. 'EXPERT' testimony was that it took 1 1/2 to 2 minutes to kill both. what do you think the killers were doing during the extra 13 minutes?
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
i do see you are still trying to play with words and now trying to be a comic.

you are clueless imo
martin II Sorry you feel that way. I understood Heidstra's testimony to be that the dog was IN the street and not behind the locked gate so he didn't want to walk his dog past Nicole's.

Not even the coroner was able to testify to the exact time that Nicole was murdered. We do know from undisputed expert testimony that Nicole was incapacitated first (they believe from a hit to the head) and that Ron was murdered and then Nicole was murdered.

Reasonable deduction tells us the timeline to be between 1030 - 1045

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II
fbg

based on your post then 15 minutes passed from the time nicole was attacked and finally killed. 'EXPERT' testimony was that it took 1 1/2 to 2 minutes to kill both. what do you think the killers were doing during the extra 13 minutes?
martin II LOL - you crack me up. It wasn't that long ago that you were arguing that Orenthal didn't have enough time to kill them........

All I am giving is a range of time. A time range that is an ESTIMATE based on testimony from people who were in the vicinity at the time. Besides, I believe that no one was with Orenthal when he murdered Nicole and Ron.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


bob
does this mean that you will now stop TELLING posters what happened???
MARTIN ii


martin II, funny. I don't tell people what happened I tell them what I believe could have happened based on all of the known facts, evidence, and witness testimony in this case.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
LOL - you crack me up. It wasn't that long ago that you were arguing that Orenthal didn't have enough time to kill them........

All I am giving is a range of time. A time range that is an ESTIMATE based on testimony from people who were in the vicinity at the time. Besides, I believe that no one was with Orenthal when he murdered Nicole and Ron.

fbg

stop playing dodge ball

the 13 minutes comes from you silly times not mine.

was anyone in the vicinity when nicole was attacked.?

you offered two impossible situations.

1. dog only barking when nicole was killed
( dog bark 10:35)
2. nicole killed after ron 10:40
imo

do you now see how conflicting that is?
martin II

[martin II]

fbg

stop playing dodge ball

the 13 minutes comes from you silly times not mine.

was anyone in the vicinity when nicole was attacked.?

you offered two impossible situations.

1. dog only barking when nicole was killed
( dog bark 10:35)
2. nicole killed after ron 10:45
imo

do you now see how conflicting that is?
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II

was anyone in the vicinity when nicole was attacked.?


martin II, maybe there was someone in the vicinity when Nicole was attacked.

Killing Time, Donald Freed
"A man visiting a neighbor of Nicole's heard a woman's scream at 10:32. Assuming it was Nicole, then she was alive and struggling.
*
(Bear in mind that the term "struggle" in this scenario includes talk, threats, argument, and, finally deadly battery.)"

bobaugust

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by martin II
do you now see how conflicting that is?martin II There's nothing conflicting about the timeline. Orenthal attacked Nicole, murdered Ron and murdered Nicole between 1030 - 1045. The dog began to bark when Orenthal began his attack on Nicole and continued the incessant barking. How do you see that as conflicting?

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snipped* There's nothing conflicting about the timeline. Orenthal attacked Nicole, murdered Ron and murdered Nicole between 1030 - 1045. The dog began to bark when Orenthal began his attack on Nicole and continued the incessant barking. How do you see that as conflicting?

fbg

ok

so oj hit nicole on the head at 10:30 knocked her out and then he just stood there until 10:40 and did WHAT?

Thats unrealistic. imo
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust


martin II, maybe there was someone in the vicinity when Nicole was attacked.

Killing Time, Donald Freed
"A man visiting a neighbor of Nicole's heard a woman's scream at 10:32. Assuming it was Nicole, then she was alive and struggling.
*
(Bear in mind that the term "struggle" in this scenario includes talk, threats, argument, and, finally deadly battery.)"

bobaugust

bob
three questions

1. did this man testify?
2. if so when and for which side?
3. what is the location of the friends house?

martinII

[limakey]

Mr. August,

Here is the problem I have about using the phone records to prove your case---Mr. Simpson's and the Browns' phone records were not the only phone records that were important. The rehab center's phone records were important as well as all of Faye's phone records, Dr. Ameli's phone records were important and so were Ronald Goldman's.

Mr. August, where do you think the DA's got their timeline from? Why do you think they didn't use Jill Schively as their witness? Don't you think that while they were investigating this case, they didn't ask the coroner or other experts on how long they thought it would take one person to kill two people with a knife--two very young and fit people? With out getting soaked in blood? You have Mr. Simpson in a complete state of rage, hacking Ronald Goldman to death, yet able to dodge the blood of his victims all the while keeping an eye on his wrist watch knowing that he only had so long before he had to meet the limo.

And your theory can't use "estimate" times when you insist on saying that Mr. Simpson killed two people in less then two minutes. Because that was only one expert's opinon. While other expert witness may testified that it could have happened in less then two minutes, it doesn't mean that is their opinon.

One last thing on the timeline---we know that there were witnesses on both sides that were never called. We know that some witnesses wouldn't testifiy because they were afraid, so why didn't the DA's use the brave Jill Schively? Either her story conflicted with a timeline they knew they needed or her story was not accurate according to other witnesses who told the DA's what they knew about that night but didn't want to get involved.

And if Nicole's letter to Cora is accurate--then I know understand why people in Nicole's circle were sleeping with guns under their pillow. IMO.

[martin II]

limakey

thanks for your post.

If Nicoles letter to Cora is accurate i am wondering who these people she talks about that were comming and going in her house
that she did not know. Why would she allow these strangers to come and go with her small children living in the house.

i am assumming that this is the period when Fay (the pipe) Resnick was living at Nicoles and i am also assumming that Nicole knew what faye was doing and that these strangers were in and out of her house to see Faye.

If a problem had developed with faye and her suppliers(money owed) that would answer the question as to why Faye, all of a suden, ran for protection in the rehab center and removed herself from nicoles home where these people had been comming.

martin II

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by martin II
If Nicoles letter to Cora is accurate you slam bobaugust for assumptions but you are willing to take a documented that has not been authenticated. There is no support that this letter was written by Nicole.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by limakey
Mr. August,

Here is the problem I have about using the phone records to prove your case---Mr. Simpson's and the Browns' phone records were not the only phone records that were important. The rehab center's phone records were important as well as all of Faye's phone records, Dr. Ameli's phone records were important and so were Ronald Goldman's.




limakey, I have no idea what you are trying to say about using telephone records. Telephone records only give us the real time telephone calls were made.

Many witnesses testified to different events they were doing the night of the murders as to what they saw or heard or didn't see or hear that night. Events that help us understand the time line. All of these witnesses gave only estimated times as to what they remembered. The only reliable estimated times are the ones that are supported by telephone records.

Estimated times are not real times and only tell us generally when something happened, not specifically. The reality is that Simpson did a lot of things in a short period of time. It's not only impossible to pin point the exact times of everything he did, it's not credible to use witnesses estimated times to say Simpson couldn't have done something.

The order that events occurred in tell us what Simpson did, not estimated times.

We know Simpson was not at Rockingham when Allan Park arrived there just after 10:20. Allan Park saw Simpson enter his house at about 10:55. It was within that half hour that Simpson killed both victims and then sped back home to Rockingham. Considering the fact that it was less than a five minute drive between Simpson's estate and Nicole's condo Simpson had plenty of time to do what the evidence tell us he did.

To reconstruct what happened and when it happened we have to start with when Allan Park saw Simpson and Kaelin at about 10:55 time and work backwards. That time estimate by Park is supported by telephone records.

Kato Kaelin testified he heard the thumps on his wall believing someone was behind his room. After those noises it took both Kaelin and Simpson the same time to make it to the front of the house when Allan Park saw them both almost simultaneously.

Before that happened Jill Shively had encountered Simpson at the intersection of Bundy and San Vicente when Simpson ran a red light almost hitting her car.

Before that Robert Heidstra had seen what what was Simpson's Bronco speeding away from Nicole's condo

Before that Heidstra had heard two male voices yelling at each other coming from Nicole's condo. Ron Goldman had arrived and confronted Simpson.

Before that Heidstra had first heard Nicole's Akita he believed was in the street outside Nicole's condo start it's continuous non stop barking. Denise Pilnak also testified that she heard the Akita first start to bark between 10:30 and 10:35. Her time estimate is supported by telephone records.

Before that Mandel and Aaronson had walked by Nicole's condo, They saw nothing out of the ordinary and didn't hear any dog barking or see any dog. No bloody paw prints, no open gate, no dead bodies. The murders had not been committed yet. They estimated that time as shortly before 10:30.

That's the timeline of the murders.

bobaugust

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by limakey

<snipped

And if Nicole's letter to Cora is accurate--then I know understand why people in Nicole's circle were sleeping with guns under their pillow. IMO.

Where are you getting your information? Link or back-up please to substantiate your above statement!

[limakey]

Mr. August,

For once, I agree with you, telephone records are accurate recorders of time. My point is that Faye Resnick told a totally unbelieveable tale about playing phone tag with Nicole that day. She is the one who was lining up suspects just in case......She also lied about what time the conversation took place and then realized when she was caught, she said she was mistaken.

Lets just say that Dr. Ameli did call Nicole at home that night, and Nicole was in a state a fear, well in a very short period of time, Nicole was fighting and crying with her best friend on the phone, she is telling her shrink she knows her life is going to end because of what happened at the dance that night, none of these phone records were even examined? What about Nicole's phone records, what did they show? I don't remember her phone records being entered into evidence nor do I think her cell phone records.

My point about using time estimates is that the DA's just didn't make up this timeline. They were using experts and basically asking them to give their opinon on how long it would take OJ Simpson, by himself to kill two people? Even adding up the stab wounds on both bodies gives a pretty good time frame. Toss in that Ron Goldman did put up a fight, as did Nicole, well that adds time to the timeline. When you toss in that Ron was either tortured or the killer hung around long enough to inflict wounds to make sure he was dead--adds more time. There is not one shred of evidence that indicates the killer was concerned about being seen or recognized, there is not one shred of evidence that the killer even left the crime scene in a hurry. There is evidence that the killer was so confident, he even walked back into the killing cage---that adds more time.

However, that does mean that the killer wasn't working on a time frame either, as long as Nicole and Ron were dead before the plane left for Chicago--they were okay. IMO, I believe the killers wanted the bodies to be found much sooner then they were, hence, the phone call by the "reporter" to the police station. Just a tad too pat, IMO.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by limakey
Mr. August,

For once, I agree with you, telephone records are accurate recorders of time. My point is that Faye Resnick told a totally unbelieveable tale about playing phone tag with Nicole that day. She is the one who was lining up suspects just in case......She also lied about what time the conversation took place and then realized when she was caught, she said she was mistaken.

Lets just say that Dr. Ameli did call Nicole at home that night, and Nicole was in a state a fear, well in a very short period of time, Nicole was fighting and crying with her best friend on the phone, she is telling her shrink she knows her life is going to end because of what happened at the dance that night, none of these phone records were even examined? What about Nicole's phone records, what did they show? I don't remember her phone records being entered into evidence nor do I think her cell phone records.

My point about using time estimates is that the DA's just didn't make up this timeline. They were using experts and basically asking them to give their opinon on how long it would take OJ Simpson, by himself to kill two people? Even adding up the stab wounds on both bodies gives a pretty good time frame. Toss in that Ron Goldman did put up a fight, as did Nicole, well that adds time to the timeline. When you toss in that Ron was either tortured or the killer hung around long enough to inflict wounds to make sure he was dead--adds more time. There is not one shred of evidence that indicates the killer was concerned about being seen or recognized, there is not one shred of evidence that the killer even left the crime scene in a hurry. There is evidence that the killer was so confident, he even walked back into the killing cage---that adds more time.

However, that does mean that the killer wasn't working on a time frame either, as long as Nicole and Ron were dead before the plane left for Chicago--they were okay. IMO, I believe the killers wanted the bodies to be found much sooner then they were, hence, the phone call by the "reporter" to the police station. Just a tad too pat, IMO.



limakey, the calls by Faye Resnick and Dr. Amelli were probably local calls that wouldn't have shown up on Nicole's phone records. Nicole didn't have a cell phone, there were no cell phones in 1994. There were car phones and I've never seen any evidence that she had one.

The fact is the killer was not seen at Bundy and it is entirely reasonable and consistent with the evidence that Simpson could have killed both victims and left Bundy in less than five minutes. The prosecutors never offered specific times of what Simpson did at Bundy only that he was there when the murders were committed.

You are imagining a fantasy about other killers so smart and clever that they never left one single trace of evidence at Bundy that points to them after killing two people. Not only that but they planting evidence that points only to Simpson including Simpson's fresh blood, and even fiber and hair evidence. They even drove a vehicle like Simpson's and one of them must have been an exact double for Simpson. And these genius supermen did all of this on a night when no one knew Simpson didn't have an airtight alibi.

And that's all before even offering some reasonable explanation why anyone would have wanted to do this to Nicole and Simpson.
.
There isn't one shred of evidence that tells us that anyone but the two victims and Simpson were at Bundy. There were no other killers.

The telephone call by the reporter wasn't even made to the West LA police station it was made to the Wilshire community police station. Your genius killers didn't even call the right police station.

I'm sorry but your speculation is pure fantasy.

bobaugust

[2L8 4A D8]

I have just realized after reading certain posts re: the telephone calls to Mezzaluna and then Juditha's last call to Nicole, that CTV's Crime Library Timeline is NOT worth the web page that it is printed on.

I don't understand how CTV can put out this information, but yet NOT do the research necessary to make sure that it is correct. People take this information as gospel because of CTV's reputation. Where did they get their Timeline information from? The National Enquirer?

JMO and MOO!!

:shrug: :confused: :shrug:

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust

*Snipped*

Before that Mandel and Aaronson had walked by Nicole's condo, They saw nothing out of the ordinary and didn't hear any dog barking or see any dog. No bloody paw prints, no open gate, no dead bodies.


The murders had not been committed yet. They estimated that time as shortly before 10:30.

That's the timeline of the murders.

bobaugust

August,

What do you mean, the murders hadn't occurred.. When Mandel and Aaronson passed 875 Bundy, Nicole and Ron lay dead... The gate slamming shut, is not anymore proof that Goldman closed it, than the woman heard scream was Nicole at 10:10p as one neighbor told police...

Heidstra was wrong on alot of points, and the gate at Nicoles being slammed by Goldman was the tip of the iceberg... You have absolutely NO PROOF, Goldman accessed the property from Bundy.. The gate being opened, should be the first clue it wasn't slammed "DUH"...

another thing...

Many of you G's believe Goldman walked up on OJ standing over Nicole, after OJ has rendered Nicole in operable, right.. Yet, in the same breathe, OJ goes to Bundy to have it out with Nicole, but is sent into a rage after Goldman walks up... If Goldman is the mechanism that triggers OJ's rage! How in the hell, or why would OJ have done whatever he did, to be standing over Nicole, as the innocent Goldman walks up?

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty


August,

What do you mean, the murders hadn't occurred.. When Mandel and Aaronson passed 875 Bundy, Nicole and Ron lay dead... The gate slamming shut, is not anymore proof that Goldman closed it, than the woman heard scream was Nicole at 10:10p as one neighbor told police...

Heidstra was wrong on alot of points, and the gate at Nicoles being slammed by Goldman was the tip of the iceberg... You have absolutely NO PROOF, Goldman accessed the property from Bundy.. The gate being opened, should be the first clue it wasn't slammed "DUH"...

another thing...

Many of you G's believe Goldman walked up on OJ standing over Nicole, after OJ has rendered Nicole in operable, right.. Yet, in the same breathe, OJ goes to Bundy to have it out with Nicole, but is sent into a rage after Goldman walks up... If Goldman is the mechanism that triggers OJ's rage! How in the hell, or why would OJ have done whatever he did, to be standing over Nicole, as the innocent Goldman walks up?



nettathirty, Simpson's defense attorneys called Mandel and Aaronson as witnesses to show that the murders hadn't been committed before 10:30.

Mandel and Aaronson walked right past the front of Nicole's condo shortly before 10:30. They heard and saw nothing out of the ordinary. No dog barking. No bloody paw prints. No gate open. No dead body. No blood. The murders had not been committed.

Criminal defense witness Heidstra tell us about ten or so minutes later he heard two male voices coming from Nicole's condo and her front gate slam. Based on the kind of voices Heidstra described he heard and all the evidence that was later found at Bundy, that's when Ron Goldman arrived at Bundy. The fact that the majority of blood from the killings and Ron's body was found between Nicole's body and the front gate tells us that was where Ron was when he was attacked and killed. The reasonable logical inference is that Ron entered the front gate.

Your confused about the possible scenario that accounts for the evidence that was found. No one knows why Simpson went to Bundy, but we can assume based on the fact that he dressed the way he did and took a knife with him that his intention was to harm Nicole.

Based on what Heidstra heard, it's very possible that when Simpson encountered Nicole their confrontation may have started with words. At that time it's possible Simpson let the Akita out the front gate and as the words got heated the confrontation escalated and got physical. The evidence is that Simpson could have hit Nicole on her forehead knocking her down. When she fell the evidence is that she could have hit the back of her head on something hard and been knocked unconscious. That confrontation is what upset the Akita outside the gate who was barking, as Heidstra described, hysterically. As Heidstra was walking down the alley with his two dogs listening to the barking Ron arrived. When Ron opened the the front gate and walked in he could have surprised Simpson who may never had heard him enter over the loud barking until Ron yelled, "Hey, hey, hey."

Simpson yelled back and attacked and killed Ron Goldman. Simpson then returned to Nicole who was still on the ground unconscious and slit her throat.

bobaugust

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by nettathirty

<snipped>

another thing...

Many of you G's believe Goldman walked up on OJ standing over Nicole, after OJ has rendered Nicole in operable, right.. Yet, in the same breathe, OJ goes to Bundy to have it out with Nicole, but is sent into a rage after Goldman walks up... If Goldman is the mechanism that triggers OJ's rage! How in the hell, or why would OJ have done whatever he did, to be standing over Nicole, as the innocent Goldman walks up?

I have never said or believed any such thing starting with "Yet..." so don't put any words in my mouth or make any assumptions because you are "dead wrong!"

If you disagree and I am sure that you do, show me my post where I have stated such!

JMO and MOO!!

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust

*Snipped*

nettathirty, Simpson's defense attorneys called Mandel and Aaronson as witnesses to show that the murders hadn't been committed before 10:30.

Mandel and Aaronson walked right past the front of Nicole's condo shortly before 10:30. They heard and saw nothing out of the ordinary. No dog barking. No bloody paw prints. No gate open. No dead body. No blood. The murders had not been committed.

The reasonable logical inference is that Ron entered the front gate.


bobaugust

August,

The same defense said that LE framed OJ, do you believe that too?

Mandel and Aaronson passing the condo and not seeing blood on the ground, does not mean the murders had not occurred.. It means the dog hadn't tracked through the blood, ie: THE DOG WAS STILL INSIDE THE CONDO, during the attacks.. Which explains why the dog didn't attack the attackers!

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8


I have never said or believed any such thing

JMO and MOO!!



2L8,

If your above statement is "true".. then I can only say, "I wasn't talking to you!"

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty


August,

The same defense said that LE framed OJ, do you believe that too?

Mandel and Aaronson passing the condo and not seeing blood on the ground, does not mean the murders had not occurred.. It means the dog hadn't tracked through the blood, ie: THE DOG WAS STILL INSIDE THE CONDO, during the attacks.. Which explains why the dog didn't attack the attackers!


nettathirty, what part of no gate open, no body, no blood can't you understand?

No, I don't believe what Simpson's attorneys said, I believe what the witnesses said.

bobaugust

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust



nettathirty, what part of no gate open, no body, no blood can't you understand?



bobaugust


NO OPEN GATE and NO BODY means, that Aaronson and Mandel passed 875 Bundy looking forward, as oppose to looking up someones walkway?

NO BLOOD means, the Dog had not come out the gate or the Condo for that matter.. But it does not mean, the murders had not been committed...

August, this is not that difficult, come on now.. Please practice a little common sense...

[martin II]

Originally posted by nettathirty


August,

The same defense said that LE framed OJ, do you believe that too?

Mandel and Aaronson passing the condo and not seeing blood on the ground, does not mean the murders had not occurred.. It means the dog hadn't tracked through the blood, ie: THE DOG WAS STILL INSIDE THE CONDO, during the attacks.. Which explains why the dog didn't attack the attackers!

netta

m Clarke seemed to have accused Aaronson of not even passing by bundy. That she walked down westgate from the resturant on her way home instead of bundy.imo
martin II

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by nettathirty

2L8,

If your above statement is "true".. then I can only say, "I wasn't talking to you!"

You stated, "Many of you G's..." Now you state that "I wasn't talking to you!" Hello, I am a "G" and you were "talking to me!" Duh!

Also, I have noticed again that you have gone in and edited my post, which is in violation of the TOS's. Are you a glutton for punishment or what? One more time and it's "3 strikes and you're out!" Oh, happy day, Oh happy day...LA LA LA LA DEE DAH!

JMO and MOO!!

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by martin II


netta

m Clarke seemed to have accused Aaronson of not even passing by bundy. That she walked down westgate from the resturant on her way home instead of bundy.imo
martin II


martiinII,

That's right, Clark did make this arguement.. I guess we'll do a little role reversal with August, he'll agree with the "DREAM TEAM" and me with the state! Go Figure!

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by nettathirty

2L8,

Are you sniffing GLUE... You must be!!

You said, the theory I purposed was not yours, then I'm only talking to the G's who felt "Goldman triggered OJ's rage"..

Get Help Soon!

I guess you didn't get the memo from Freshwater about being civil. At least I have this post to send to her if you continue. Oh happy day, Oh happy day...LA LA LA LA DEE DAH!

JMO and MOO!!

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8


I guess you didn't get the memo from Freshwater about being civil. At least I have this post to send to her if you continue. Oh happy day, Oh happy day...LA LA LA LA DEE DAH!

JMO and MOO!!


2L8,

Or should I say, tattletail?

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by nettathirty

2L8,

Or should I say, tattletail?

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Sticks and stones can break my bones, but names from the likes of you can't hurt me!

It's not my fault that you didn't see FW's post!

JMO and MOO!!

[limakey]

wukong,

A few days ago, I made a post about a timeline that the DA's had to have had, after Simpson got into the limo at Rockingham.

Yet, I don't know if they ever interviewed the person who met him at the Chicago airport, did he meet him in the airport? Did Simpson pick up how own bags? What time did he check into the hotel and what time did the call come through?

Did LE ever run a check on his door activity?

If you are completely fair in this case, then you have to consider that the DA's were not putting their case together soley based on the backing then the wailing of the dog.

Have you ever looked at other timelines?

Hope all is well. Bigfoot is just getting bigger and bigger. It can't be healthy to eat 3 Big Macs and it is just wrong, after eating those three Big Macs to take his mother's cheeseburger! IMO.!