Nicole's letter to Cora

[Wukong]

Hi all,

Long time no see. I have been busy and have no time to rehash old arguments. I have discovered that Mario is in possesion of a previously unreleased letter from Nicole to Cora. To see the handwritten letter and transcript of the contents go to Mario's Myspace link below. You will need to be a Myspace member to see the handwritten originals, but you can see the transcript without being a member.

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=61948323&blogID=169891087&MyToken=e332aaaf-a63f-4849-aef2-704871986699

I have not read anything here in quite a while. Is there anything new being discussed?

Wukong

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Wukong
Hi all,

Long time no see. I have been busy and have no time to rehash old arguments. I have discovered that Mario is in possesion of a previously unreleased letter from Nicole to Cora. To see the handwritten letter and transcript of the contents go to Mario's Myspace link below. You will need to be a Myspace member to see the handwritten originals, but you can see the transcript without being a member.

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=61948323&blogID=169891087&MyToken=e332aaaf-a63f-4849-aef2-704871986699

I have not read anything here in quite a while. Is there anything new being discussed?

Wukong



Brian, good to see you back. I too saw Mario's blog when he wrote it and checked out the handwritten copies. I've been waiting to see how long it will be before Garrison's followers learn of it and will use the letters to find more proof that Fuhrman was the killer. Funny.

Everything's the same here. A couple of new faces with the same old arguments based on the same old false and misinformation. It seems even the new posters refuse to learn the huge amount of information that became known in the depositions and the new evidence that was presented in the civil trial. All they want to do is argue that the criminal trial jury verdict was correct.

bobaugust

[goatgirl]

I am not sure about this letter ....

but the handwritting does look seem to look like Nicoles
very loopy.

the letter "I" seems to stand out to me...

GoatGirl
:)

http://www.handwriting.org/images/samples/nicole.htm

[martin II]

Originally posted by goatgirl
I am not sure about this letter ....

but the handwritting does look seem to look like Nicoles
very loopy.

the letter "I" seems to stand out to me...

GoatGirl
:)

http://www.handwriting.org/images/samples/nicole.htm

as they say consider the source.

martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by goatgirl
I am not sure about this letter ....

but the handwritting does look seem to look like Nicoles
very loopy.

the letter "I" seems to stand out to me...

GoatGirl
:)

http://www.handwriting.org/images/samples/nicole.htm

gost girl
this is the second letter i have read in this case where nicole was asking oj to give her another chance. yet some say she dumped him. imo:confused:

[limakey]

Martin,

If this letter is real, then it proves what I have been saying along about Paula and OJ's and Nicole's relationship.

[martin II]

Originally posted by limakey
Martin,

limakey
If this letter is real, then it proves what I have been saying along about Paula and OJ's and Nicole's relationship.

IF this letter is real, it seems that nicole is saying that she was at least partyl to blame for some of the problems she and oj had in their relationship. the printed version offered by this guy MARIO
(nicole to cora) shows that nicole was worried about oj's relationship with Paula.(calling her skinny etc)imo
martin II

[tazzybaby]

Hi Wukong!

If this is real then why wasn't it in the trial? How in the world did Mario get his hands on it? I can't look at myspace at work...dangit. But, I'll check it out tonight. I did read what Goatgirl posted on Iago. I don't know why she would write Cora a note though.

:shrug:

[martin II]

Originally posted by tazzybaby
Hi Wukong!

If this is real then why wasn't it in the trial? How in the world did Mario get his hands on it? I can't look at myspace at work...dangit. But, I'll check it out tonight. I did read what Goatgirl posted on Iago. I don't know why she would write Cora a note though.

:shrug:
hi tazzy

if you mean why would nicole write cora a note, i am wondering the same thing. cora lived close by and they talked on the phone
frequently.imo
martin II

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by martin II

hi tazzy

if you mean why would nicole write cora a note, i am wondering the same thing. cora lived close by and they talked on the phone
frequently.imo
martin II


:shrug: I know some ppl find writting therapeutic, maybe Nicole liked to write letters?

Nicole wrote simpson a few notes, like the one below

"O.J I think I have to put this all in a letter. A lot of years ago I used to do much better in a letter, I'm gonna try it again now"

but I have no clue if Nicole wrote the letter Mario has, an expert would have to confirm that!

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

Goatgirl

[Wukong]

I don't know who gave Mario the letter, but he told me it was from a very reliable source whom he cannot disclose. As for it's autenticity, I am no handwriting expert but compared to other known samples of her handwriting it sure looks like she wrote it judging by the handwriting itself and the style with which it was written.

I am not sure which letter Martin read, but judging from his comments it doesn't seem like the same letter I read. I didn't see where Nicole was asking OJ for another chance and I also missed where she said she was partly to balme. I guess I have to consider the source.

[Wukong]

Here are the contents of the letter for reference.

"Cora,

Sorry I had to get off so fast the other night. O.J. brought the kids home early and I wanted to talk to him about the bracelet. Remember I told you I gave it back to him - well, He gave it to that b*tch he's been seeing!!! Can you believe it!! He's a piece of work, huh?

I don't know why I should even give a sh*t what he does - but the truth is I do! Iv'e seen her and she's not so hot - skinny and big lips. He says she's a nice girl and I wish him well, but it still bugs me. Isn't that strange. I still have that "power" over him though - like when I moved in last year. He took me right back in a second. He would again too - I know it. We just have each other in the blood I guess.

I've told you before, it's the sex- always was, always will be. he just gets too rough, that's all. It used to be a turn - on - now I'm
black and blue for days. Not only that we make so much noise I'm afraid the kids will hear, oh well. He gets angry when I say no but I'm really conflicted - sometimes I want in - sometimes I want out - you know what I've been going through. Agony.

You know Faye - she hates him - but secretly I think she's really "hot" for O.J. So the tension when he stops buy is awful. He's on me, she's on me - everybody's on me. It's a nightmare. I'm always tired. Stress I guess. All wound up. I hate having someone around all the times. So many people. I don't even know, or like for that matter coming and going - So, if I seem edgy Cora I'm only concerned about the kids.

Faye hangs with a crowd that frankly scares me. She's really a nice person but very addictive. I've had my flings - see what this lifestyle did to Denise. The children are too important. I can't give O.J. any excuses (like he's perfect..) but he's right too. He doesn't like her for a reason. he says she's a lousy mother - maybe, but she's got problems - that why I try to help.

Oh well, see you Tues. don't say anything to you know - who.
We'll take it one day at a time.

Nicole"

[martin II]

Originally posted by Wukong
I don't know who gave Mario the letter, but he told me it was from a very reliable source whom he cannot disclose. As for it's autenticity, I am no handwriting expert but compared to other known samples of her handwriting it sure looks like she wrote it judging by the handwriting itself and the style with which it was written.

I am not sure which letter Martin read, but judging from his comments it doesn't seem like the same letter I read. I didn't see where Nicole was asking OJ for another chance and I also missed where she said she was partly to balme. I guess I have to consider the source.

wukong

see the note from goat girl.

Mario pops up with a lot of accusations but never any proof of what he 'KNOWS' to be fact. He seems to be a "sources said person" or a junior high student passing along gossip.imo
martin II

[martin II]

wukong

can you get your guy mario to tell us the date of this letter to Cora? at least.
martin II

[Wukong]

Originally posted by martin II
wukong

can you get your guy mario to tell us the date of this letter to Cora? at least.
martin II

I asked, he doesn't know. I'm not sure why you're trashing the possibility this letter cam from Nicole's hand since it seems, in part, to support the NG position??

[limakey]

Wukong,

I hope all is well with you and your family.

IMO, this letter, if it is true makes one thing obvious, that Nicole and OJ still played the break up to make up game. I have no doubt they loved each other very much, but I don't think Nicole could ever truly trust him---and I don't blame her for that.

What I find every interesting is Nicole's comments about Faye. I wonder if Faye knew about this letter and if she did, when did she know about it?

[Wukong]

Limakey,

Hi! All is well with me, thanks for asking. I've got two daughters getting married before the end of the year, 15 new products I'm trying to get to production and designing a house I'm building here in Taiwan. I'm a little busy..LOL! How are you and Bigfoot doing?

I agree with your assessment of the letter, if it is in fact genuine. If it is really from Nicole, which I have no reason to doubt, it certainly shows her state of mind about a few things going on in her life. I don't see anything earth shattering in the letter that leads us to any resolution on the BIG question of OJ's guilt or innocence (I'm not talking about judgements made in court, but whether he is truly responsible for the murders). So it seems the fighting and bickering over the minutae of this case continues. I have no time right now to rejoin the fray and frankly am quite tired of repeating the same arguments over and over. There is a quote from one of my favorite people of all time that sums this up:

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.¡¨ Albert Einstein

[martin II]

Originally posted by limakey
Wukong,

I hope all is well with you and your family.

IMO, this letter, if it is true makes one thing obvious, that Nicole and OJ still played the break up to make up game. I have no doubt they loved each other very much, but I don't think Nicole could ever truly trust him---and I don't blame her for that.

What I find every interesting is Nicole's comments about Faye. I wonder if Faye knew about this letter and if she did, when did she know about it?

wukong
when was this letter written IF by nicole?

martin

[martin II]

Originally posted by Wukong


I asked, he doesn't know. I'm not sure why you're trashing the possibility this letter cam from Nicole's hand since it seems, in part, to support the NG position??
WUKONG
Mario makes many charges with no proof of any. good reason to
quesiton his latest piece of evidence. imo
martin II

[Wukong]

Originally posted by martin II


wukong
when was this letter written IF by nicole?

martin

Asked and answered. Read above.

[tazzybaby]

Originally posted by martin II

hi tazzy

if you mean why would nicole write cora a note, i am wondering the same thing. cora lived close by and they talked on the phone
frequently.imo
martin II

Hi Martin,

Yes, that is what I meant. I am not saying that the note is authentic or not. I do find it very odd that she would write her a note. I understand why she would write OJ a note. But, not Cora. She could call her very easily. They saw each other frequently. It's just bizarre.

:shrug:

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by Wukong
Limakey,

Hi! All is well with me, thanks for asking. I've got two daughters getting married before the end of the year, 15 new products I'm trying to get to production and designing a house I'm building here in Taiwan. I'm a little busy..LOL! How are you and Bigfoot doing?

<snipped>

Wukong, so glad to see you back and posting again. I thought that maybe you had given up on the OJ Board. My, my ~ yes you are one busy guy. Hang in there because remember ~ when the "going gets tough, the tough go shopping" ~ oops, wrong gender, sorry!

:seeya: Your Pal 2L8!

[martin II]

Originally posted by tazzybaby


Hi Martin,

Yes, that is what I meant. I am not saying that the note is authentic or not. I do find it very odd that she would write her a note. I understand why she would write OJ a note. But, not Cora. She could call her very easily. They saw each other frequently. It's just bizarre.

:shrug:

tazzy
as usual mario fails to send facts along with these pieces of 'EVIDENCE' that he gives to wukong. At least he did not toss out his tease by saying he will tell us at a later time. hahaha
martin II

[tazzybaby]

Originally posted by martin II


tazzy
as usual mario fails to send facts along with these pieces of 'EVIDENCE' that he gives to wukong. At least he did not toss out his tease by saying he will tell us at a later time. hahaha
martin II

Hi Martin,

I believe Mario. He puts everything that he has out in the open for us to see. I can't verify for myself. And, he didn't see Nicole write the note. He can only go by what the person that gave it to him says. Whether it's real or not, I still find it very odd that she would write it.

:seeya:

[martin II]

Originally posted by tazzybaby


Hi Martin,

I believe Mario. He puts everything that he has out in the open for us to see. I can't verify for myself. And, he didn't see Nicole write the note. He can only go by what the person that gave it to him says. Whether it's real or not, I still find it very odd that she would write it.

:seeya:
tazzy
most people require proof when these stories pop up.
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II

tazzy
most people require proof when these stories pop up.
martin II Or he can do like you do: "It's been said....."

[Wukong]

I'm sure if Mario said that Dick Wagner gave him the letter, Martin would believe it then.

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by martin II


wukong
when was this letter written IF by nicole?

martin



Hi Martin

I would guess this letter was written after May 19
as Oj stated during his interrogation w/ the police on June 13,


OJ I may have given her the earrings. No, the bracelet,
May 19th. When was Mother's Day?

VA Mother's Day was around that...

OJ No, it was probably her birthday, yes.

VA And did she return it the same day?

OJ Oh, no, she...I'm in a funny place here on this, all
right? She returned it -- both of them -- three weeks
ago or so, because when I say I'm in a funny place on this
it was because I gave it to my girlfriend and told her it
was for her, and that was three weeks ago. I told her I
bought it for her. You know? What am I going to do with
it?



source:

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Simpson/oj-stmnt.html

Goatgirl
:)

[martin II]

Originally posted by Wukong
I'm sure if Mario said that Dick Wagner gave him the letter, Martin would believe it then.

wukong

not so.

there was a time that i respected some of your post even with all of their biases. but you continue to post these unproven accusations made by your loco buddy mario it makes me wonder if you and mario are one and the same.imo

martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by tazzybaby


Hi Martin,

I believe Mario. He puts everything that he has out in the open for us to see. I can't verify for myself. And, he didn't see Nicole write the note. He can only go by what the person that gave it to him says. Whether it's real or not, I still find it very odd that she would write it.

:seeya:
tazzy

ok

but the problem for me is that no one here knows IF any one gave mario this note. Mario seems to believe that people must believe these unproven facts that he offers. he does not even give a hint of the source of his info.
is it that he is afraid that cora will beat him as he claims the cops did?

if you posted some NOTE making accusation on this board the first thing FBG or others would do is demand proof(if they dissagreed with the contents of the note) imo
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Or he can do like you do: "It's been said....."

fbg
then do you believe that this note was written by nicole?
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
then do you believe that this note was written by nicole?
martin II Haven't thought about it. I do, however, believe Nicole's diary (I don't have to 'guess' if it's her handwriting), the notes from the defense psychologist that interviewed Orenthal and determined he fit the profile of a batterer and Nicole fit the profile of a battered spouse, and the notes from the battered women's shelter where Nicole said she was afraid of Orenthal and what he was capable of doing to her.

[limakey]

Martin,

IMO, I don't think it should surprise anyone that information and in some cases evidence is "discovered" but the source of it remains a "mystery".

I can truly understand why many people refuse to get involved because it may put themselves or their families in harm's way. However, they still feel the need to do the "right" and do so, but not in a conventional manner. IMO.

[jotun]

Originally posted by Wukong

why you're trashing the possibility this letter cam from Nicole's hand since it seems, in part, to support the NG position??

All
Sure does.The main part.The point being FEAR.
Nicole:
'I hate having someone around all the times.So many people.I don't even know,or like for that matter coming and going.Faye hangs out with A CROWD THAT FRANKLY SCARES ME.'
jotun

[Wukong]

Originally posted by jotun


All
Sure does.The main part.The point being FEAR.
Nicole:
'I hate having someone around all the times.So many people.I don't even know,or like for that matter coming and going.Faye hangs out with A CROWD THAT FRANKLY SCARES ME.'
jotun

Why would you take two sentences from different paragraphs and string them together to make it appear as though it is a complete thought? Very manipulative.

[martin II]

wukon

Who ever wrote this note did want to show that Nicole and Cora
were much closer than some g's here want to admit.
fbg has pointed that Nicole was angry with Cora for asking her to lie about her relationship with some man and in some was this meant that they were not close.
but then this note shows nicole telling cora about the details of her sex activities with oj. seems to me that shows a special closeness.imo
martin II

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by limakey
Wukong,
*Snipped*

What I find every interesting is Nicole's comments about Faye. I wonder if Faye knew about this letter and if she did, when did she know about it?


Limakey,

The question I have is did, the D.A. and Petrocelli know about this letter during the trials (Criminal & Civil).. If so, when did they know, if it was during the trial, this proves evidence to exonerate OJ was deliberately kept from the public...

as in the Brett Cantor case!

[Wukong]

Netta,

In order for this letter to help exonerate OJ, the fantasy of a drug hit would have to be proven. Not even the Defense wanted to go there because they knew it was not the case. The defense threw out this theory, along with many others, to attempt to draw attention away from the fact that OJ killed two people. Brett Cantor's murder had nothing to do with this case, just ask his family.

[jotun]

Originally posted by Wukong


"Cora,

I hate having someone around all the times. So many people. I don't even know, or like for that matter coming and going -


Faye hangs with a crowd that frankly scares me.

Nicole"


O.J."I have no doubt, the answer to these murders lies in the world of Faye Resnick."

There it IS!!! In the words of Nicole.This "world" Faye brought into Nicole's home."So many people I don't even know or like coming and going.
Faye hangs with a crowd that frankly scares me."
jotun

[jotun]

Originally posted by nettathirty

Limakey,

The question I have is did, the D.A. and Petrocelli know about this letter during the trials (Criminal & Civil).. If so, when did they know, if it was during the trial, this proves evidence to exonerate OJ was deliberately kept from the public...



Netta
Sure they did.All the evidence that exonerates O.J. was kept out of the trials.

During the money trial.Baker wanted to call Cora to testify but for some reason didn't.Think, tho not sure, to tell things she knew about Nicole.The judge wouldn't allow it.Also A.C.wasn't allowed by the judge to tell anything against Nicole or anything favorable to O.J.Maybe bobaugust can find the tanscript for us.

jotun

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by jotun


Netta
Sure they did.All the evidence that exonerates O.J. was kept out of the trials.

During the money trial.Baker wanted to call Cora to testify but for some reason didn't.Think, tho not sure, to tell things she knew about Nicole.The judge wouldn't allow it.Also A.C.wasn't allowed by the judge to tell anything against Nicole or anything favorable to O.J.Maybe bobaugust can find the tanscript for us.

jotun LOL - have either one of you even read Cora's or Cowlings depositions? LOL -- trust me -- orenthal didn't want them to testify.

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by jotun



O.J."I have no doubt, the answer to these murders lies in the world of Faye Resnick."

There it IS!!! In the words of Nicole.This "world" Faye brought into Nicole's home."So many people I don't even know or like coming and going.
Faye hangs with a crowd that frankly scares me."
jotun makes it sound like maybe orenthal wrote that letter doesn't it? hmmmm -- no, I'll take that back -- the letter was literate.

[limakey]

Taz,

I'm not surprised at all about Nicole writing notes or letters to friends. While Nicole may have been raised most of her life in the US, she was still raised European. IMO, letter writing is a long lost art form. Thank you notes and such things that we were raised with, is no longer an automatic response in today's world.

Also, it appears to me that Nicole, like many people have a difficult time believing they can get the true meaning of their words and feelings across verbally or face to face and feel they can better express themselves, in a letter.

IMO, I think that many people also believe that when you write a letter to a person, you have that person's total attention, at least for the length of time it takes them to read it. Again, IMO.

[limakey]

Wukong,

Congratulations on your daughters' impending marriages! If you are not happy about them---then just give me names and numbers and I'll see what I can do! HA HA.

I have to disagree with a few of your statements on this thread. IMO, there are no minute (sp?) issues in this case. Each question that has been asked has been fair and completely reasonable.

IMO, I don't think the drug hit theory is a fantasy or totally out of line because of what families will do and say to hide the real reasons their loved one met an untimely death. I have first hand experience on what families will say and/or believe. IMO, it is their protection of their loved one's reputation after death.

As a parent, I can honestly understand why so many parents and friends want their loved one to be remembered for their life, and not how they died. I also think that many young people have had and continue to led a double life. A life that their parents and friends have no idea about.

And if I remember correctly, even OJ Simpson wanted to protect Nicole's image after she died. He did not want any of the details of her possible drug use to come out. Didn't he the thank Petrocelli for dropping this issue in his depo?

We do know that Sydney Simpson did hear her mother crying and fighting that night on the phone, it wasn't OJ Simpson, so who was it?

Then we find out that another witness claims to have even called Nicole that night and Nicole told her what happened at the dance that night and that OJ Simpson was coming after her that night. This witness claims that it was her idea that she invite a friend over to stay with her until OJ left for his trip.

So where does that leave us---two eye witnesses were left off the witness list and one motive witness was left off the witness list. There has to be a reason why and I don't think it had anything to do with credibility. IMO.

One more thing, how do we know that it wasn't Nicole who was at the wrong place at the wrong time?

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by limakey
And if I remember correctly, even OJ Simpson wanted to protect Nicole's image after she died. He did not want any of the details of her possible drug use to come out. Didn't he the thank Petrocelli for dropping this issue in his depo? There were no drugs in Nicole's system at the time of her autopsy. Orenthal's blood test showed drugs. Who do you think he was trying to protect? Nicole didn't need his help -- she was clean. Maybe he was worried about his image.

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by limakey
We do know that Sydney Simpson did hear her mother crying and fighting that night on the phone, it wasn't OJ Simpson, so who was it? What makes you think it wasn't orenthal? because sydney said it was a friend? do you not think it is a possibility that nicole told her that so that she wouldn't know it was her daddy making her mom so unhappy?

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by limakey
One more thing, how do we know that it wasn't Nicole who was at the wrong place at the wrong time? Hmm....it was Nicole's home, she was attacked first and no one knew Ron was on his way there.

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by limakey
Then we find out that another witness claims to have even called Nicole that night and Nicole told her what happened at the dance that night and that OJ Simpson was coming after her that night. This witness claims that it was her idea that she invite a friend over to stay with her until OJ left for his trip.

So where does that leave us---two eye witnesses were left off the witness list and one motive witness was left off the witness list. There has to be a reason why and I don't think it had anything to do with credibility. Who were the two witnesses?

[fbgweezer]

I find it curious that the same posters who discount nicole's diary entries have taken on this unauthenticated letter -- beacause the "I's" look a lot like Nicole's handwriting -- and its contents as gospel.

the letter was written to Cora -- seems like orenthal could authenticate the letter by asking Cora.

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva


and....why didn't the Defense call them???? LOL. socal you know the answer to this -- "the defense doesn't have to prove anything."

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snipped* There were no drugs in Nicole's system at the time of her autopsy. Orenthal's blood test showed drugs. Who do you think he was trying to protect? Nicole didn't need his help -- she was clean. Maybe he was worried about his image.

fbg
we have discussed this before. no drugs in nicoles system on the day she died does not in any prove that she did not do coke at times before she died.imo
nicole needed his help on that IRS scam she tried to pull off.

believe me whatever nicole was doing, oj knew.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
I find it curious that the same posters who discount nicole's diary entries have taken on this unauthenticated letter -- beacause the "I's" look a lot like Nicole's handwriting -- and its contents as gospel.

the letter was written to Cora -- seems like orenthal could authenticate the letter by asking Cora.

fbg
why would oj care now.?
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
LOL. socal you know the answer to this -- "the defense doesn't have to prove anything."

fbg
at least by your statement ,you seem to understand the requirements in a ceiminal trial.
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
why would oj care now.?
martin II Don't you remember? orenthal said he was going to look for the 'real' killers of Nicole and Ron.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snipped* Hmm....it was Nicole's home, she was attacked first and no one knew Ron was on his way there.

fbg
in this little note, it is said that nicole was not happy with all the people she did not know coming to her house because of faye.

i believe fays had considerable heat on her when she ducked into rahab.imo
:)
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
we have discussed this before. no drugs in nicoles system on the day she died does not in any prove that she did not do coke at times before she died.imo
nicole needed his help on that IRS scam she tried to pull off.

believe me whatever nicole was doing, oj knew.
martin II the fact of the matter is, Nicole had no drugs in her system on the night of her death. orenthal did. So whose reputation do you think he was most interested in protecting?

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Don't you remember? orenthal said he was going to look for the 'real' killers of Nicole and Ron.

fbg
one has to let go at some point, don't you think. imo
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
in this little note, it is said that nicole was not happy with all the people she did not know coming to her house because of faye.

i believe fays had considerable heat on her when she ducked into rahab.imo
:)
martin II what little note? are you telling me that you are using an unauthenticated, unsupported document submitted by someone you have blasted?

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
one has to let go at some point, don't you think. imo
martin II tell it to orenthal. he was willing to do a pay for view lie detector test for funds for a 'reward' --

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
the fact of the matter is, Nicole had no drugs in her system on the night of her death. orenthal did. So whose reputation do you think he was most interested in protecting?

fbg
oj had only traces of weed baby, traces of weed . so he definately was not high on 6/12.
martinii

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
what little note? are you telling me that you are using an unauthenticated, unsupported document submitted by someone you have blasted?

fbg
i should have used my usual 'If this note is authentic" because there is no proff that it is comming from mario.imo
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
tell it to orenthal. he was willing to do a pay for view lie detector test for funds for a 'reward' --

fbg
the money was to be used to investigate to find the real killer.
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
oj had only traces of weed baby, traces of weed . so he definately was not high on 6/12.
martinii you mean the 'law abiding citizen' had been smoking pot? isn't marijuana illegal in california?

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
i should have used my usual 'If this note is authentic" because there is no proff that it is comming from mario.imo
martin II how stupid! you're not sure that it is from mario but you're sure it's written by Nicole.

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
the money was to be used to investigate to find the real killer.
martin II riiiggghhhtt! because he's expended so much energy, time and resources trying to find the 'real' killer.

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
oj had only traces of weed baby, traces of weed . so he definately was not high on 6/12.
martinii


interesting...I wasnt aware they did drug testing on Simpson?

is there a link, so I can read up:read:

Thxs
gg

[goatgirl]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by limakey
[B]

Then we find out that another witness claims to have even called Nicole that night and Nicole told her what happened at the dance that night and that OJ Simpson was coming after her that night. This witness claims that it was her idea that she invite a friend over to stay with her until OJ left for his trip.

*snip 4 space*

sorry if I missed something, but are you talking about Faye?
or someone else?

Thxs
gg

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by goatgirl
[QUOTE]Originally posted by limakey
[B]

Then we find out that another witness claims to have even called Nicole that night and Nicole told her what happened at the dance that night and that OJ Simpson was coming after her that night. This witness claims that it was her idea that she invite a friend over to stay with her until OJ left for his trip.

*snip 4 space*

sorry if I missed something, but are you talking about Faye?
or someone else?

Thxs
gg yeah - we're all waiting on that answer.

[Wukong]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
in this little note, it is said that nicole was not happy with all the people she did not know coming to her house because of faye.

i believe fays had considerable heat on her when she ducked into rahab.imo
:)
martin II

The note did not indicate that the people coming around were connected to Faye. You buddy OJ Nut said this and tried to make the connection by taking two sentences of the note from two different paragraphs and stringing them together making it seem like that was what Nicole meant. Re-read the letter and show me where she said it was Faye's friends coming and going.

Nicole could not have done any drugs for at least 72 hours before she was killed according to the drug screen at autopsy. Nicole admitted to doing drugs in the past and the last time she did was in January of that year (according to testimony in depositions that I don't have a link to at the moment).

Limakey, you say it wasn't OJ on the phone that night. How can you be sure? I'm not saying it was OJ, but it certainly has not been ruled out and must be just your opinion.

Martin, in response to why OJ never looked for the "real killers" is that you have to let go at some point. OJ never looked for the real killers, so when do you think he "Let go" of Nicole? As I see it, as soon as he was acquited he forgot all about Nicole.

The drug hit theory is a FANTASY dreamed up by a defense team that was scrambling - looking for anything that would divert attention away from the overwhelming evidence against their client.

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by Wukong
Netta,

In order for this letter to help exonerate OJ, the fantasy of a drug hit would have to be proven. Not even the Defense wanted to go there because they knew it was not the case. The defense threw out this theory, along with many others, to attempt to draw attention away from the fact that OJ killed two people. Brett Cantor's murder had nothing to do with this case, just ask his family.


Wu,

Welcome and Congrats!!!!

2 Things

1. The letter written to Cora from Nicole, specifically the portion about Faye.. Nicole doesn't say the people are drug people, she says they scare her.. IIRC, the defense didn't say anything about a drug hit, like so much of the things in this case, drug hit was drawn from the fact that Resnick had a drug problem (Drug Treatment Center)... The drug hit theory came from the media!

2. How can the Cantor case and the Bundy Murders not be related.. Talk about coincidents, the victims in both cases knew each other, and frequent the same places.. They were all killed in the "EXACT" same manner, knife to death in BRENTWOOD..
Heck, the "The Hillside Strangler" was a convicted serial killer, and the commonality in his crimes, was they were committed in California..

(Not trying to pass myself off as a historian of the "Hillside Strangler" case) just a point of reference!

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by nettathirty
1. The letter written to Cora from Nicole, specifically the portion about Faye.. Nicole doesn't say the people are drug people, she says they scare her.. IIRC, the defense didn't say anything about a drug hit, like so much of the things in this case, drug hit was drawn from the fact that Resnick had a drug problem (Drug Treatment Center)... The drug hit theory came from the media! The letter is unsupported and unauthenticated. The defense floated the theory of a drug hit.

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by nettathirty
2. How can the Cantor case and the Bundy Murders not be related.. Talk about coincidents, the victims in both cases knew each other, and frequent the same places.. They were all killed in the "EXACT" same manner, let me see -- if I follow your logic, Kardashian and Cochran deaths have to be connected to orenthal. They both knew him and they both died of a disease.

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snipped* let me see -- if I follow your logic, Kardashian and Cochran deaths have to be connected to orenthal. They both knew him and they both died of a disease.


If OJ had a disease, then yes, the applied logic would work.. next?

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



If OJ had a disease, then yes, the applied logic would work.. next? he said he has arthritis -- does that count? it is a disease.

[jotun]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
oj had only traces of weed baby, traces of weed . so he definately was not high on 6/12.
martinii

Martin
Yes,only a trace of weed.This was from the limo where Park had been smoking a 'cigarette'.
jotun

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
he said he has arthritis -- does that count? it is a disease.


NO, OJs disease at best my leave him somewhat cripple, not DEAD!

Ron, Nicole and Brett Cantor, were all killed in Brentwood by knife.. They frequent the same night club, same health club and were attacked in their front yard at night!

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snipped* The letter is unsupported and unauthenticated. The defense floated the theory of a drug hit.


fbg,

Are you sure the defense floated that theory, or was it suggested by the multitude of TV experts as a possbile defense strategy!

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by jotun


Martin
Yes,only a trace of weed.This was from the limo where Park had been smoking a 'cigarette'.
jotun so the drugs found in orenthal's blood was from Park? :shrug:

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



NO, OJs disease at best my leave him somewhat cripple, not DEAD!

Ron, Nicole and Brett Cantor, were all killed in Brentwood by knife.. They frequent the same night club, same health club and were attacked in their front yard at night! oh -- so I guess I'll have to wait for orenthal to drop dead before I can use your logic?

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



fbg,

Are you sure the defense floated that theory, or was it suggested by the multitude of TV experts as a possbile defense strategy! I'm sure -- it was the defense.

[limakey]

Wukong,

The reason I believe it was not OJ is because he called the house, and asked to speak to Sydney. So at the time of the phone call, Sydney was still up.

Faye Resnick said that she was in fact the "best friend" that was talking to Nicole that night, but she wasn't crying, she was laughing. OJ Simpson has since said that Sydney is a bright girl, she would know the difference between her mother crying and giggling.

IMO, if the "best friend" was Simpson, then Sydney would have testified. She would not be the first or even the youngest witness to take the stand.

The defense didn't introduce drugs into this case, it was an issue that should have been explored in much more detail then it was--even if it was just to rule it out. The fact that Faye was living with Nicole and that she participated in an intervention less then two weeks before her murders, should have been looked at.

Also, we know that Nicole was being followed, why? Why would anyone steal Paula's bronco, follow Nicole and then ditch the car with the notebook still inside it?

Wukong---what I do find interesting that during his interview the police, Simpson never said a word about drugs---never said that Nicole was hanging around people who had drug problems, etc.

IMO, if Simpson was the killer, he would have been throwing out details left and right, just to take the heat off of him for a while. Again, only my opinon.

[limakey]

Martin,

You make an excellent point---did the DA's know about the letter and when did they find out. IMO, if they knew about this letter, then there is no way they would ever call her to the stand. I think that might be a reason why the DA's did, in their books, let Faye off of the hook for writing her books. They didn't want her any where near the witness stand.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
so the drugs found in orenthal's blood was from Park? :shrug:

fbg
i think the point is that Park was sitting on the curb near the ashford gate smoking. That may be why he was confused about how many times he rang the bell, that he saw a sceond car, didn't see the bronco, got mixed up on which bags he put where,did not see the bronco parked at rockingham when he left
and got lost on the way to the airport.imo
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
i think the point is that Park was sitting on the curb near the ashford gate smoking. That may be why he was confused about how many times he rang the bell, that he saw a sceond car, didn't see the bronco, got mixed up on which bags he put where,did not see the bronco parked at rockingham when he left
and got lost on the way to the airport.imo
martin II Park's testimony was supported by phone records. He wasn't confused. Orenthal lied.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Park's testimony was supported by phone records. He wasn't confused. Orenthal lied.

fbg

it must be difficult..parks telephone records did not verify:

park sitting on the curb
park seeing a second car
park nor knowing where he put the bags
not seeing the bronco as he left
getting lost on the way to the airport.

weed does make people see things that may not be there.
imo
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg

it must be difficult..parks telephone records did not verify:

park sitting on the curb
park seeing a second car
park nor knowing where he put the bags
not seeing the bronco as he left
getting lost on the way to the airport.

weed does make people see things that may not be there.
imo
martin II there is proof that orenthal had drugs in his system at the time of the murders. How about you provide proof that Park did? You so scared of Park's testimony that you're willing to blast him for something you made up?

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
there is proof that orenthal had drugs in his system at the time of the murders. How about you provide proof that Park did? You so scared of Park's testimony that you're willing to blast him for something you made up?

fbg
smoking or drinking. i dont know which but one thing is for sure he was very confused about what he saw and did not see. he looked at one car in the driveway and saw two. he looked at the bronco as he left the rockingham gate and "thought there is something in my view". when it was the bronco 3-4 feet away from his limo in plain sight. then he reads the wrong exit sign on the highway on the way to the airport.
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
smoking or drinking. i dont know which but one thing is for sure he was very confused about what he saw and did not see. he looked at one car in the driveway and saw two. he looked at the bronco as he left the rockingham gate and "thought there is something in my view". when it was the bronco 3-4 feet away from his limo in plain sight. then he reads the wrong exit sign on the highway on the way to the airport.
martin II I thought Park was very credible. He had nothing to gain when he told the truth.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
so the drugs found in orenthal's blood was from Park? :shrug:

fbg
what exactly do you mean by drugs found in oj's blood?

do you kow what his blood test showed.
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
what exactly do you mean by drugs found in oj's blood?

do you kow what his blood test showed.
martin II I know they found drugs in his system.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snipped* let me see -- if I follow your logic, Kardashian and Cochran deaths have to be connected to orenthal. They both knew him and they both died of a disease.

fbg

it really amazes me how you pretend to evaluate the words of a poster and then say ' If i follow your logic' OR " so you are saying " and then in your head, twist every word of the poster as if he/she posted what you are now accusing the hin/her of saying.

you need to try to respond to posters without reinterpreting their words unless you are requested to do so.

martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg

it really amazes me how you pretend to evaluate the words of a poster and then say ' If i follow your logic' OR " so you are saying " and then in your head, twist every word of the poster as if he/she posted what you are now accusing the hin/her of saying.

you need to try to respond to posters without reinterpreting their words unless you are requested to do so.

martin II I was just following the poster's logic that if you know someone and they die, chances are it was because they knew you.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
I know they found drugs in his system.

fbg

again

they found TRACES of marijuana (weed) in his blood. which means that he could have smoked a joint at anytime from several weeks before 6/12 or a few days before 6/12.

if he had smoked on 6/12 the level would have been higher imo

now i understand why you use the word drugs as this is your way to maby sugges it was coke or some other hard drug in his system. this would go right along with how you reinterpret facts to give it your spin.imo
martin II

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
I'm sure -- it was the defense.


fbg,

Nope, it was the media!

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
smoking or drinking. i dont know which but one thing is for sure he was very confused about what he saw and did not see. he looked at one car in the driveway and saw two. he looked at the bronco as he left the rockingham gate and "thought there is something in my view". when it was the bronco 3-4 feet away from his limo in plain sight. then he reads the wrong exit sign on the highway on the way to the airport.
martin II


martin II, your accusation that Park was smoking weed or drinking and that's why he did not remember every detail correctly making mistakes that we know are mistakes has no basis in fact. And could just as well apply to you based on your confusion and many mistakes you've made on this discussion group. Are you partaking before you post?

Park as well as every witness who attempts to remember details about something that wasn't significant to them at the time it happened may make mistakes about what they remember. That's why all witness testimony if possible should be supported by evidence or other witness testimony to have more confidence in what they say they remember.

Park was not confused about how many times he buzzed the house from the gate nor was he confused about how many bags he loaded into the limousine and he never got lost on the way to the airport. You're the one whose confused.

bobaugust

[martin II]

BOB

You don't know what Park was doing when he was sitting on the street curb 'Passing the time away" I don't know either but considering he was constantly ringing the bell, looking at one car and seeing double, said at one time he put some bags inside the limo and then at another that he put them in the trunk. Then not seeing the bronco parked at the rockingham gate and finally making the wrong turn on the highway, It seems to me that his head was spinning or he just got confused on what he was suppose to say after being prompeted by the prosecution prior to his testimony. imo
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
I was just following the poster's logic that if you know someone and they die, chances are it was because they knew you.

fbg
nope just your usual spinning and twisting.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
I thought Park was very credible. He had nothing to gain when he told the truth.

fbg
some have sugested that he was prompted by his lawyer mother
in addition to m clarke.

remember the whole jury asked for a readback of his testimony because there were questions about his testimony.

martin II

[limakey]

Mr. August,

According to a story that was published during the criminal trial, Allan Park bragged that he was smoking weed. Apparently OJ Simpson made a comment that he thought the kid was on something because he missed the exit for the airport.

Wukong did a study of Park's testimony and understands why it is pretty shakey---does that mean he is lying? No. Does it mean he did the best he could to remember the chain of events and what he saw and didn't see, yes. However, to say that they were totally right about this issue but are allowed to be wrong on other issues, makes no sense.

I totally agree with you that for many witnesses in the case, on both sides, total, perfect recall would be too much to ask, yet you demanding that the defense witnesses have total recall and don't give them a break if they got something mixed up or wrong.

And you know as well as I do, if the defense's had total recall and were "positive" about everything they said, you say their perfect recall is a sign of guilt.

Also, you forget, no matter who you are, when ever the police, the DA's or even defense lawyers, deem you as an important witness and keep on stressing how important it is for you to recall certain events, there is a huge amount of stress that goes along with it. IMO.

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by limakey
According to a story that was published during the criminal trial, Allan Park bragged that he was smoking weed. support please for this statement.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snipped* support please for this statement.

FBG
Did you miss this statement also or do you just at every turn ask ng's for proof. imo
m,artin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II
BOB

You don't know what Park was doing when he was sitting on the street curb 'Passing the time away" I don't know either but considering he was constantly ringing the bell, looking at one car and seeing double, said at one time he put some bags inside the limo and then at another that he put them in the trunk. Then not seeing the bronco parked at the rockingham gate and finally making the wrong turn on the highway, It seems to me that his head was spinning or he just got confused on what he was suppose to say after being prompeted by the prosecution prior to his testimony. imo
martin II


martin II, you've created a fantasy in your head that's contradicted by the facts.

You're the one confused because you don't even know what Park said. It sounds to me like you're making false accusations about Park that would seem to apply to you more than they would apply to Park.

bobaugust

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


FBG
Did you miss this statement also or do you just at every turn ask ng's for proof. imo
m,artin II yes I missed this statement -- I've asked for you to support your statement about Park so now it's time you put up or shut up.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by limakey
Mr. August,

According to a story that was published during the criminal trial, Allan Park bragged that he was smoking weed. Apparently OJ Simpson made a comment that he thought the kid was on something because he missed the exit for the airport.

Wukong did a study of Park's testimony and understands why it is pretty shakey---does that mean he is lying? No. Does it mean he did the best he could to remember the chain of events and what he saw and didn't see, yes. However, to say that they were totally right about this issue but are allowed to be wrong on other issues, makes no sense.

I totally agree with you that for many witnesses in the case, on both sides, total, perfect recall would be too much to ask, yet you demanding that the defense witnesses have total recall and don't give them a break if they got something mixed up or wrong.




limakey, don't believe everything you read in the media.

I have never heard where Park ever said any such thing about smoking weed and Park never missed the exit for the airport. It sounds to me like someone from the Simpson camp trying to start rumors to discredit a witness that testified to facts incriminating to Simpson.

Wukong didn't find anything wrong with Park's testimony as to the facts he testified to. Wukong did a study about the number of bags Simpson said he had evidently trying to confuse the bag issue. Park only described some of the bags differently than Simpson described them.

No I don't demand anything different of defense witnesses. You're generalization is wrong. Tell me one defense witness that you think got something wrong and that I said something about, please. Now you're making false accusations.

bobaugust

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva


fbg, you know Martin will do neither. Netta still hasn't supplied her link that I requested twice. They just toss it out there & hope it sticks. If someone challenges it, they tell you to do your own research :rolleyes: I know -- what's williams' word? prevaricators --

[William Anthony]

Originally posted by bobaugust



limakey, don't believe everything you read in the media.

I have never heard where Park ever said any such thing about smoking weed and Park never missed the exit for the airport. It sounds to me like someone from the Simpson camp trying to start rumors to discredit a witness that testified to facts incriminating to Simpson.

Wukong didn't find anything wrong with Park's testimony as to the facts he testified to. Wukong did a study about the number of bags Simpson said he had evidently trying to confuse the bag issue. Park only described some of the bags differently than Simpson described them.

No I don't demand anything different of defense witnesses. You're generalization is wrong. Tell me one defense witness that you think got something wrong and that I said something about, please. Now you're making false accusations.

bobaugust

Still trying to hide, hey bobbie and I see you have your following with you. Sorry, for exposing you on the other thread, if I did.

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by William Anthony


Still trying to hide, hey bobbie and I see you have your following with you. Sorry, for exposing you on the other thread, if I did. are you following bob to this thread to bait him? there are rules against it, you know.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
are you following bob to this thread to bait him? there are rules against it, you know.

fbg
bob post on most threads. no one has to follow him around to find him. additionally bob can answer for himself unless you have a opinion on the curse subject.imo

you slang names at people all over the place and when challenged you start making threats about the rules. please.
martin II

[limakey]

Mr. August,

I agree that you should follow your own advice--and not believe everything the media said---I couldn't resist! Just a joke between the sides---no war.

Why would the defense try to discredit a witness who they knew already was mistaken in his testimony? They didn't need to call him a liar---in fact, he was a perfect example of how hard it is recall certain events, that while we may think our memories are like DVD recorders, they, in reality, are most unreliable "witness" there is. However, the DA's had a reason to toss out some bait to the media--just did it in a different style then what they did with Jill.

Mr. Park was also perfect for the defense, he was a timeline witness--who buried the DA's timeline. They didn't need to discredit him. IMO.

[limakey]

Mr. August,

To get back on thread---what do you think of the letter? Does it signify anything to you?

[limakey]

Mr. August,

Yes, Wukong did do a study about the bags. However, this issue was another thorn in the DA's side. They could not address this issue without the defense tearing it apart.

However, I believe Wukong said that Park could not have seen certain things that he said he did. And while I believe he testfied as to what he saw, honestly, it doesn't mean that he was right about everything.

So if Park is testifying that he is sure that he saw what he could not have seen and testify about things he didn't see but should have, then what do you do?

Do you believe about what he saw when he said he saw the wrong amount of cars in the driveway? If he claims to have seen a light on in the house, in a window and he couldn't have seen the light, then do you believe him about other things? Not saying that he is liar, just that he was mistaken on some important issues.

Oh and as for the bags, and which ones were missing, too bad the cops in Chicago never thought to look for them. But then again, maybe they did and found nothing.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by limakey
Mr. August,

Yes, Wukong did do a study about the bags. However, this issue was another thorn in the DA's side. They could not address this issue without the defense tearing it apart.




limakey, both Park and Kaelin were consistent in their testimony about the small dark colored knapsack as to what happened when Kaelin went to get it and Simpson stopped him, and as to what Simpson said.

Simpson on the other hand completely denied that ever happened.

When Park was shown all of the different bags brought to court in the criminal trial, he testified that the small dark colored knapsack was not one of them

The fact is that after Simpson picked up that bag it has never been seen again.

bobaugust

[Wukong]

Originally posted by bobaugust

limakey, both Park and Kaelin were consistent in their testimony about the small dark colored knapsack as to what happened when Kaelin went to get it and Simpson stopped him, and as to what Simpson said.

Simpson on the other hand completely denied that ever happened.

When Park was shown all of the different bags brought to court in the criminal trial, he testified that the small dark colored knapsack was not one of them

The fact is that after Simpson picked up that bag it has never been seen again.

bobaugust

Although Park may have been wrong on several occasions, he was in total agreement with Kato and Simpson on the main points of the knapsack description and location.

Park was not the only one who testified that the faux knapsack presented in court was not the same one that was behind the Bentley; Kato and Simpson both said the same thing. Yes, even Simpson could not identify the bag in court.

[martin II]

Originally posted by Wukong


Although Park may have been wrong on several occasions, he was in total agreement with Kato and Simpson on the main points of the knapsack description and location.

Park was not the only one who testified that the faux knapsack presented in court was not the same one that was behind the Bentley; Kato and Simpson both said the same thing. Yes, even Simpson could not identify the bag in court.

wukong

I didn't park say one time he put the two items in the trunk and then again he said he put them inside the limo. i will have to check this again.imo
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



limakey, both Park and Kaelin were consistent in their testimony about the small dark colored knapsack as to what happened when Kaelin went to get it and Simpson stopped him, and as to what Simpson said.

Simpson on the other hand completely denied that ever happened.

When Park was shown all of the different bags brought to court in the criminal trial, he testified that the small dark colored knapsack was not one of them

The fact is that after Simpson picked up that bag it has never been seen again.

bobaugust

bob

Parks memory of what he saw in this case as it relates to the bags and cars, was proven to be very faulty.He could not consistantly remember where he put the bags he had in his own hand imo
This guy looked in the driveway at the bently and saw another car next to it when there was only the bently. He stuck to the two car sighting although he was told there was only one imo

He also said he saw things that was impossible for him to see from where he was at Ashford. It is my opinion that he was prompted by the da or his lawyer mother.
martin II

martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



limakey, both Park and Kaelin were consistent in their testimony about the small dark colored knapsack as to what happened when Kaelin went to get it and Simpson stopped him, and as to what Simpson said.

Simpson on the other hand completely denied that ever happened.

When Park was shown all of the different bags brought to court in the criminal trial, he testified that the small dark colored knapsack was not one of them

The fact is that after Simpson picked up that bag it has never been seen again.

bobaugust

bob
your problem on the issue of this bag is you don't have any proof indicating what was in this bag and you do need proof not just what you think imo
martin II

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by martin II

bob
your problem on the issue of this bag is you don't have any proof indicating what was in this bag and you do need proof not just what you think imo
martin II

"...and you do need proof not just what you think imo"

Yeah, and you need to practice what you preach!

I think, I believe, I heard, I read, so-and-so said ~ Sound familiar? ~ No proof, ever! Just what you think, always!

JMO and MOO!!

[martin II]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8


"...and you do need proof not just what you think imo"

Yeah, and you need to practice what you preach!

I think, I believe, I heard, I read, so-and-so said ~ Sound familiar? ~ No proof, ever! Just what you think, always!

JMO and MOO!!

2L
As you can see, my post was to bob.

martin II

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by martin II

2L
As you can see, my post was to bob.

martin II

As you can see above, Wukong was posting to Bob, but you jumped in and posted to Wukong. Again, practice what you preach!

Many times you have been told that this is a public message board. Thus, I can post to whomever I please!

JMO and MOO!!

P.S. Freshwater asked us to be "civil" or didn't you see her post? Maybe you need a reminder from Freshwater? I can help you with that! LOL!

[limakey]

Wukong,

Yes, Kato and Park may have testified about the knapsack's description and its location. However, if you add in the timelines, when and where did OJ Simpson get rid of this bag?

And I have no problem with anyone believing that OJ Simpson took the evidence with him, what I have a problem with is that he had such a narrow timeline to make it disappear even for a few days let lone over 10 years.

However, if you believe in the state's case, then it is obvious that not only the DA's believed he got rid of the evidence before he left for Chicago, but the cops did as well.

So, if he got rid of it before he left LA, where did it go?

[goatgirl]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by limakey
[B]
snip*

Yes, Kato and Park may have testified about the knapsack's description and its location. However, if you add in the timelines, when and where did OJ Simpson get rid of this bag?

And I have no problem with anyone believing that OJ Simpson took the evidence with him, what I have a problem with is that he had such a narrow timeline to make it disappear even for a few days let lone over 10 years.




:shrug: I always wondered why no one ever provided any video footage from airport security....

~~GoatGirl~~

[limakey]

GoatGirl,

I have wondered that myself, about an airport security camera.

I think that this would have been very, very helpful to the DA's.

I would love to see the "x-rays" of OJ's luggage. Doesn't only make sense that if these were available, it would have solved the "missing" bag?

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by limakey
Wukong,

Yes, Kato and Park may have testified about the knapsack's description and its location. However, if you add in the timelines, when and where did OJ Simpson get rid of this bag?

And I have no problem with anyone believing that OJ Simpson took the evidence with him, what I have a problem with is that he had such a narrow timeline to make it disappear even for a few days let lone over 10 years.

However, if you believe in the state's case, then it is obvious that not only the DA's believed he got rid of the evidence before he left for Chicago, but the cops did as well.

So, if he got rid of it before he left LA, where did it go?
Originally posted by bobaugust

Re: "missing bag"

jotun, you're confused. The small knapsack is still missing.

If Simpson had put it in the cover bag of his golf clubs then all we have to do is follow the golf clubs to learn when Simpson could have disposed of the knapsack.

When Simpson got to Chicago his golf clubs were put in the trunk of the limousine that took him to his hotel. Since the driver was going to pick Simpson up later and drive him to the golf tournament Simpson's golf clubs remained in the trunk of the limousine.

Later that morning after Simpson told the police he would return to LA as soon as possible Simpson called the limo driver to pick him up. Only the driver was not expecting to go back to the hotel and pick Simpson up about three hours and he was quite a distance away from the hotel. Simpson called the driver four times before he decided the driver would not make it back in time.

Simpson called him at 8:25, and then at 8:32. and then at 8:34, and then at 8:48. Each time Simpson called the driver told him he should take alternative transportation because he was so far away.

The driver eventually made it back after Simpson left and then drove to the airport putting Simpson's golf clubs on a later flight.

The morning after Simpson returned from Chicago Kardashian drove him to his and Skip Taft's office for meetings. After the meetings Simpson was concerned about his golf clubs and want to go to the airport and get them. Robert Shapiro advised him not saying "you're wife's just been murdered, and you're worried about golf clubs?' It will look wrong, said the lawyer. Send someone else. Going there yourself would be stupid, out of character.'"

Considering Simpson still hadn't even seen his small children yet his concern for his golf clubs was very strange.

Simpson didn't listen. He had Kardashian drive him to the airport. Simpson got his golf clubs and then put them in Kardashian's garage. Simpson was staying at Kardashian's house. If the knapsack was in the golf bag cover then Simpson could very well have disposed of it any time after that.

bobaugust

Old Post 07-10-2006 07:28 PM

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by limakey
GoatGirl,

I have wondered that myself, about an airport security camera.

I think that this would have been very, very helpful to the DA's.

I would love to see the "x-rays" of OJ's luggage. Doesn't only make sense that if these were available, it would have solved the "missing" bag?

I don't think that they were x-raying baggage in 1994, but I could be wrong and will stand corrected if I am. And if they were, why would OJ take the chance of the black knapsack bag being x-rayed if it contained the knife and the shoes, etc.? Doesn't make sense.

JMO and MOO!!

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8

snip*

I don't think that they were x-raying baggage in 1994, but I could be wrong and will stand corrected if I am.
JMO and MOO!!


Hi 2L8

The FAA required all airlines to screen passengers & carry-on baggage since 1973 :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airport_security

~~GoatGirl~~

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by limakey
GoatGirl,

I have wondered that myself, about an airport security camera.

I think that this would have been very, very helpful to the DA's.

I would love to see the "x-rays" of OJ's luggage. Doesn't only make sense that if these were available, it would have solved the "missing" bag?

Hi Limakey

I agree, security footage of what OJ Simpson was doing at both airports would have been huge!

Do we know if the police or lawyers ever looked into this?

~~GoatGirl~~
:)

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by goatgirl


Hi 2L8

The FAA required all airlines to screen passengers & carry-on baggage since 1973 :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airport_security

~~GoatGirl~~

Thanks GG! How you find all these links is amazing to me. We need all the help that we can get on the OJ Board!

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8


Thanks GG! How you find all these links is amazing to me. We need all the help that we can get on the OJ Board!

:beer: you are welcome!

~~Goatgirl~~

[goatgirl]

bump.

[Wukong]

OJ left the bag in the back of the limo, which was retrieved and disposed of the next day. Although noone seems to want to believe this because they consider the source unreliable, we still have witnesses at the airport who saw OJ get out of the limo without the bag. This confirms the original source that the bag was left in the limo. IMO, of course.

[tazzybaby]

Originally posted by Wukong
OJ left the bag in the back of the limo, which was retrieved and disposed of the next day. Although noone seems to want to believe this because they consider the source unreliable, we still have witnesses at the airport who saw OJ get out of the limo without the bag. This confirms the original source that the bag was left in the limo. IMO, of course.

I believe. I wish Rocky could be located and interviewed or forced to talk. I believe OJ would freak to see him on the news. It would be great to see Mario interview (confront) him.

[martin II]

Originally posted by tazzybaby


I believe. I wish Rocky could be located and interviewed or forced to talk. I believe OJ would freak to see him on the news. It would be great to see Mario interview (confront) him.

mario says he knows where rocky is. I think it was in Arizona or Texas that he has phone records or numbers for rocky.

But for some reason mario continues to play the tease game on verious message boards. imo
martin II