Evidence that Places OJ Simpson at the Crime Scene

[2L8 4A D8]

<snipped>

The blankety blank MF went behind the quarters alone, where he could have planted the glove, at which time he bent the fence, making it appear that someone had jumped the fence.

<snipped>

I have not read anything about this, but would you or any of your comrades care to explain the absence of MF's fingerprints on the bloody glove that he supposedly planted at Rockingham? I mean, you'd have all us believe that MF just picked up the bloody glove at Bundy with his bare hands and stuffed that same bloody glove into one of his pockets to take to Rockingham to be planted. Yeah, right!

Is there any evidence, testimony or proof that MF was walking around Bundy from Minute 1 wearing latex gloves and carrying in his pocket(s) some plastic bags? Was MF wearing these same latex gloves driving over to Rockingham with Vanatter? Was MF wearing these same latex gloves climbing over the wall at Rockingham? If he wasn't, what happened to his used latex gloves? Just curious! :confused:

JMO and MOO!

[deputydi]

I have not read anything about this, but would you or any of your comrades care to explain the absence of MF's fingerprints on the bloody glove that he supposedly planted at Rockingham? I mean, you'd have all us believe that MF just picked up the bloody glove at Bundy with his bare hands and stuffed that same bloody glove into one of his pockets to take to Rockingham to be planted. Yeah, right!

Is there any evidence, testimony or proof that MF was walking around Bundy from Minute 1 wearing latex gloves and carrying in his pocket(s) some plastic bags? Was MF wearing these same latex gloves driving over to Rockingham with Vanatter? Was MF wearing these same latex gloves climbing over the wall at Rockingham? If he wasn't, what happened to his used latex gloves? Just curious! :confused:

JMO and MOO!
I've never believed Fuhrman planted the gloves, but just fyi, investigators always carry latex gloves when they are investigating a crime scene. They also carry plastic "boots" to avoid contaminating potential evidence. These guys didn't seem to know what they were doing (according to the defense anyway) so who knows what they did or did not have with them.

[2L8 4A D8]

I've never believed Fuhrman planted the gloves, but just fyi, investigators always carry latex gloves when they are investigating a crime scene. They also carry plastic "boots" to avoid contaminating potential evidence.

<snipped>

Yes, I understand that. Thank you for the information.

[bobaugust]

So, they were not concerned with any danger to Simpson or anyone at Simpson's estate between 2 and 4;30 and deliberately disobeyed their commanders orders, according to your post.

When the detectives were at Bundy they never had any concerns about Simpson's welfare. Commander Bushey asked Phillips to notify Simpson in person as a courtesy to Simpson instead of him having to learn about the death of his ex wife in the media..

I assume that when you say they disobeyed their commander's orders you are referring to Phillips and Fuhrman, right? No, they didn't disobey the order, they had more important things to do at the crime scene first and by about 2:30 AM Phillips learned they no longer had the case. It was up to the Robbery Homicide detectives who assumed responsibility for the case to fulfill Commander Bushey's order and that's what Lange and Vannatter did.

February 15, 1995 Ronald Phillips
Q BY MS. CLARK: AND AFTER HAVING RECEIVED THAT INFORMATION, SIR, WHAT DID YOU DO?
A I WALKED BACK INTO THE RESIDENCE AND INFORMED DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, AND I BELIEVE THERE WAS A POLICE OFFICER WITH HIM, THAT THE CASE NOW BELONGED TO ROBBERY-HOMICIDE, IT WAS NO LONGER OUR INVESTIGATIVE RESPONSIBILITY AND THAT WE WERE GOING TO LEAVE THE RESIDENCE AND GO BACK OUT TO DOROTHY AND BUNDY AND AWAIT THE ARRIVAL OF THE ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DETECTIVES.
Q SO YOU NOTIFIED THE UNIFORMED OFFICER AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN WHO WERE INSIDE THE HOUSE?
A YES.
Q AND DID THEY THEN COME OUT WITH YOU?
A YES.
Q AND WHERE DID YOU GO?
A WALKED BACK SOUTHBOUND IN THE ALLEY TO DOROTHY AND THEN BACK OUT TO DOROTHY AND BUNDY WHERE THE POLICE CARS WERE PARKED AND THE OTHER SUPERVISORS WERE STANDING AROUND.
Q SO AT THAT POINT, WAS THERE ANYONE LEFT IN THE SCENE, THE CRIME SCENE?
A NOT IN THE CRIME SCENE ITSELF, NO. THE PERIMETER WAS STILL ESTABLISHED.

bobaugust

[William Anthony]

When the detectives were at Bundy they never had any concerns about Simpson's welfare. Commander Bushey asked Phillips to notify Simpson in person as a courtesy to Simpson instead of him having to learn about the death of his ex wife in the media..

I assume that when you say they disobeyed their commander's orders you are referring to Phillips and Fuhrman, right? No, they didn't disobey the order, they had more important things to do at the crime scene first and by about 2:30 AM Phillips learned they no longer had the case. It was up to the Robbery Homicide detectives who assumed responsibility for the case to fulfill Commander Bushey's order and that's what Lange and Vannatter did.

February 15, 1995 Ronald Phillips
Q BY MS. CLARK: AND AFTER HAVING RECEIVED THAT INFORMATION, SIR, WHAT DID YOU DO?
A I WALKED BACK INTO THE RESIDENCE AND INFORMED DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, AND I BELIEVE THERE WAS A POLICE OFFICER WITH HIM, THAT THE CASE NOW BELONGED TO ROBBERY-HOMICIDE, IT WAS NO LONGER OUR INVESTIGATIVE RESPONSIBILITY AND THAT WE WERE GOING TO LEAVE THE RESIDENCE AND GO BACK OUT TO DOROTHY AND BUNDY AND AWAIT THE ARRIVAL OF THE ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DETECTIVES.
Q SO YOU NOTIFIED THE UNIFORMED OFFICER AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN WHO WERE INSIDE THE HOUSE?
A YES.
Q AND DID THEY THEN COME OUT WITH YOU?
A YES.
Q AND WHERE DID YOU GO?
A WALKED BACK SOUTHBOUND IN THE ALLEY TO DOROTHY AND THEN BACK OUT TO DOROTHY AND BUNDY WHERE THE POLICE CARS WERE PARKED AND THE OTHER SUPERVISORS WERE STANDING AROUND.
Q SO AT THAT POINT, WAS THERE ANYONE LEFT IN THE SCENE, THE CRIME SCENE?
A NOT IN THE CRIME SCENE ITSELF, NO. THE PERIMETER WAS STILL ESTABLISHED.

bobaugust

He did not tell them to await the arrival or robbery homocide. He ordered them to go and make the notification, not stand around drinking coffee and eating doughnuts, and talking about the last person the blankety blank MF framed. The other officers there coud have protected the integrity of the already contamined crime scene, while they went to make notification. I believe they were upset and disobeyed orders. I think the blankety blank went along because he wanted to be part of the investigation, arrest, if any, and the trial. I am sure that they could have found out Simpson's address, which was only a five minute drive away, without the assistance of the blankety blank MF. When they got no answer, they thought Simpson had fled or was fleeing and needed to make a fast and, imo, an unconstitutional search of his estate. The red spot could have been ketchup, paint, fingernail polish, or a mark from a crayon or magic marker. How did they know the manner in which Simpson normally parked on the street? It may have not been the way any of them parked their cars, but, could have been Simpson's normal parking manner. They were not in a hurry to make notification and showed no concern for his children or anyone else after they were pulled from the case. Why did they not show concern that Simpson could be another victim, immediately after discovering that Nicole was Simpson's ex-wife, instead of standing in the street drinking coffee, eating doughnuts and chatting about their past unlawfull conduct? Remember, we are speculating.

[William Anthony]

I have not read anything about this, but would you or any of your comrades care to explain the absence of MF's fingerprints on the bloody glove that he supposedly planted at Rockingham? I mean, you'd have all us believe that MF just picked up the bloody glove at Bundy with his bare hands and stuffed that same bloody glove into one of his pockets to take to Rockingham to be planted. Yeah, right!

Is there any evidence, testimony or proof that MF was walking around Bundy from Minute 1 wearing latex gloves and carrying in his pocket(s) some plastic bags? Was MF wearing these same latex gloves driving over to Rockingham with Vanatter? Was MF wearing these same latex gloves climbing over the wall at Rockingham? If he wasn't, what happened to his used latex gloves? Just curious! :confused:

JMO and MOO!

Bailey, as an ex-marine, during his questioning told of how marines carry items in bags and in their socks. This would also explain why the glove appeared wet/shinny when it was collected. It would have been easy for him at Bundy to dispose of the latex gloves he used to collect the glove, after placing the glove in a bag and inside his sock. Once gaining, imo, illegal entry into Simpson's estate, and hearing the statement of the thumps, he could have on his solo jouney to the dark area behind Kato's quarters to look for a suspect, without his weapon drawn, gotten laytex gloves from his inside his suit jacket pocket or other sock, or pants pocket, withdrawn the glove from the bag, planted it, placed the laytes gloves inside the bag and back into his socks. Speaking of socks, since the blankety blank wore a suit, it is reasonable to speculate that he wore dress socks. Were there any pictures taken of the blankety blanks ankles prior to his departure from Rockingham? That last question is made in jest, even if the speculation is not unreasonable.:)

[William Anthony]

Just because you start a Thread, doesn't mean that it belongs to you and you're the Boss. Coldwater locks Threads over at CTV if they go O/T. I am sure that the same rules that apply to CTV apply here at the Crime Library. If you don't agree, ask Freshwater.

It makes it easier for future reference when the Threads are started according to the subject matter and stay on subject and don't go O/T, especially if they end up on Page 2 or are Archived. Kinda like a checks and balance system if and when you want to refer back to the Thread.

That is my only reason for being so "topic oriented!" Sorry you don't get it, but I will just consider the source!

JMO and MOO!!

I have not taken ownership of any thread and only suggested how other topics may enter into a thread. It would appear that you are attempting to take control by telling posters what they should and should not post. The title of the thread does not change because other issues are on it and I fail to see how this would deter referencing of the thread. As I think you have an unnatural desire to be a moderator, I have considered the souce.

[bobaugust]

Bailey, as an ex-marine, during his questioning told of how marines carry items in bags and in their socks. This would also explain why the glove appeared wet/shinny when it was collected. It would have been easy for him at Bundy to dispose of the latex gloves he used to collect the glove, after placing the glove in a bag and inside his sock. Once gaining, imo, illegal entry into Simpson's estate, and hearing the statement of the thumps, he could have on his solo jouney to the dark area behind Kato's quarters to look for a suspect, without his weapon drawn, gotten laytex gloves from his inside his suit jacket pocket or other sock, or pants pocket, withdrawn the glove from the bag, planted it, placed the laytes gloves inside the bag and back into his socks. Speaking of socks, since the blankety blank wore a suit, it is reasonable to speculate that he wore dress socks. Were there any pictures taken of the blankety blanks ankles prior to his departure from Rockingham? That last question is made in jest, even if the speculation is not unreasonable.:)


Fung testified that when he saw the glove there were areas on it that had a sheen or shininess. Fung testified based on his experience with blooded clothing and their appearance, it appeared to him to be dry.

Bailey's speculation is based only on speculation . Not facts. There isn't one single fact or one single shred of evidence that supports that speculation. It's absurd and discredited. Fuhrman was not wearing a jacket at Rockingham.

Triumph of Justice,
No one ever saw a second glove at Bundy. Cops were crawling all over this crime scene for two full hours before Fuhrman arrived. They found one glove only, not two. There was no second glove at Bundy to plant at Rockingham.

For many hours after the discovery of the bodies, police were canvassing the Bundy neighborhood, knocking on doors, asking what people had seen and heard. How did Fuhrman know what this would reveal? What if someone had said, "I saw four short men with ski masks come tearing out of the condo and go running south on Bundy at 10:45'? Or, It was three white guys. One had red hair, one was blond, the third was six foot eight and had rings in his nose. Their car was blocking my driveway and I go the license plate'? Where's the frame job then? How did Fuhrman know an eyewitness would not walk right up to the police and say, "I saw the murders"? If he'd planted the glove at Rockingham and they'd caught a different killer, Fuhrman would go to jail, conceivably for life.

The crime scene was swimming with blood. How did Fuhrman know whose blood that was? The real killer could have dropped gallons all over the garden. It could have been anyone's blood. The killer would have been positively identified by this blood, clearing Simpson and leaving Fuhrman exposed.

What if the glove Fuhrman supposedly planted at Rockingham was covered with someone's blood other than Simpson's? To frame Simpson you need Simpson's blood at Simpson's home. How could Fuhrman possibly know the blood on the glove was Simpson's.

What if Simpson had an air tight alibi? Fuhrman was sleeping when the cops caught the call. How did he know Simpson wasn't on an airplane or at a restaurant or making a television appearance at the time of the murders?

There are no answers to these and many, many more questions except to say that this theory of the planted glove is absurd and discredited. It didn't happened. The glove was found at Rockingham for one reason" O.J. Simpson dropped it there falling against a wall in the dark when returning from killing Ron and Nicole.

bobaugust

[William Anthony]

Mr. August,

There were at least two jurors who felt the gloves did fit and he was acting. There were other jurors felt the gloves didn't fit. However, all of them did agree that the actual fit of the gloves didn't matter. Not one juror has ever said that the glove demonstration was based on the fit of the gloves.

And, be fair Mr. August, the state had years and years of experience with evidence, do you mean to tell us that they did not know the gloves could shrink? And the DA's never counted the defense's expert on this issue. They relied on a salesman or a former salesman as their expert. The defense did not. They had a witness who conducted experiments and the results of those experiments were presented to the jury.

Like or not Mr. August, the defense matched witness for witness, expert for expert and if these experts were lying, surely the DA's could have produced witnesses who would testify to that.

Dear Limakey,

Perhaps, the most colossal blunder the prosecution made, other than the glove demonstration, was allowing Rubin to testify about his manipulation of the gloves. I wondered why JC did not object to the demonstration more vigorously. The question was not how the gloves would have fit if they were in a condition near to their original condition, but would the gloves fit him in the condition they were. His entire testimony was, imo, irrelevant, immaterial and superfluous to the issue. After his testimony, I realized how wise JC was. He trusted the jury to see the lengths the prosecution would go to in order to place Simpson's hands in those gloves. His manipulation of the gloves maligned his testimony and mutilated the prosecution's case, imo.

[bobaugust]

He did not tell them to await the arrival or robbery homocide. He ordered them to go and make the notification, not stand around drinking coffee and eating doughnuts, and talking about the last person the blankety blank MF framed. The other officers there coud have protected the integrity of the already contamined crime scene, while they went to make notification. I believe they were upset and disobeyed orders. I think the blankety blank went along because he wanted to be part of the investigation, arrest, if any, and the trial. I am sure that they could have found out Simpson's address, which was only a five minute drive away, without the assistance of the blankety blank MF. When they got no answer, they thought Simpson had fled or was fleeing and needed to make a fast and, imo, an unconstitutional search of his estate. The red spot could have been ketchup, paint, fingernail polish, or a mark from a crayon or magic marker. How did they know the manner in which Simpson normally parked on the street? It may have not been the way any of them parked their cars, but, could have been Simpson's normal parking manner. They were not in a hurry to make notification and showed no concern for his children or anyone else after they were pulled from the case. Why did they not show concern that Simpson could be another victim, immediately after discovering that Nicole was Simpson's ex-wife, instead of standing in the street drinking coffee, eating doughnuts and chatting about their past unlawfull conduct? Remember, we are speculating.


After the case was assigned to Robbery Homicide, Philips as a West LA detective had neither the responsibility nor the authority to notify Simpson without approval from the Robbery Homicide detectives who were responsible for this case.

Lange asked both Phillips and Fuhrman to come to Rockingham with them because Fuhrman knew where Simpson's house was. Having someone lead them to the house was a lot faster than trying to find it on their own. Lange told Phillips that after they made the notification Phillips and Fuhrman could stay with Simpson and help him recover his two small children who were taken to their police station so that he and Vannatter could get back to the Bundy as quickly as possible. Lange thought they should be back in about twenty minutes or less. That plan was approved by Lange and Vannatter's supervisor.

The West LA detectives as well as the Robbery Homicide detectives didn't have any concern that Simpson could be another victim before they went to Rockingham. They had no reason to think that. It was only after how the situation developed at Rockingham that gave them that concern.

bobaugust

[William Anthony]

Fung testified based on his experience with blooded clothing and their appearance, it appeared to him to be dry.

Fuhrman was not wearing a jacket at Rockingham.

Triumph of Justice,



How did Fuhrman know an eyewitness would not walk right up to the police and say, "I saw the murders"? If he'd planted the glove at Rockingham and they'd caught a different killer, Fuhrman would go to jail, conceivably for life.

The crime scene was swimming with blood. How did Fuhrman know whose blood that was?


What if Simpson had an air tight alibi? Fuhrman was sleeping when the cops caught the call. How did he know Simpson wasn't on an airplane or at a restaurant or making a television appearance at the time of the murders?

snipped
bobaugust

We do not need Fung to tell us that dry blood does not appear shiny. Did it ever occur to you that the blankety blank MF did not wear his jacket, in order to cover up his unlawful conduct? Furman testified he saw "them". You can believe that he did not understand the question, but remember LE is trained how to testify. Others can speculate that he was lying as he admitted he would do.

He waited around to hear what the neighbors had seen. He would have only gone to jail if they could prove he planted the glove. The blankety blank was not concerned with whose blood it was; only planting evidence that would give Simpson complicity in the murders. He learned what Simpson had done and the last time he was seen from Kato, before going to plant the glove.

[bobaugust]

Dear Limakey,

Perhaps, the most colossal blunder the prosecution made, other than the glove demonstration, was allowing Rubin to testify about his manipulation of the gloves. I wondered why JC did not object to the demonstration more vigorously. The question was not how the gloves would have fit if they were in a condition near to their original condition, but would the gloves fit him in the condition they were. His entire testimony was, imo, irrelevant, immaterial and superfluous to the issue. After his testimony, I realized how wise JC was. He trusted the jury to see the lengths the prosecution would go to in order to place Simpson's hands in those gloves. His manipulation of the gloves maligned his testimony and mutilated the prosecution's case, imo.

Rubin didn't refurbish the gloves in the criminal trial, he did that in the civil trial. Before Simpson tried the gloves on over latex gloves they had been sitting in evidence for about a year.

The condition of the gloves doesn't mean anything. What matters is would those gloves fit Simpson. They were made to fit skin tight and the only way that skin tight gloves fit properly is if they are pulled on ones fingers. Simpson didn't do that because he didn't want them to fit. But if he had wanted them to fit they would have. Please don't tell me that Simpson actually fooled you? I thought you said you had some personal experience with expensive thin leather skin tight dress gloves?

These gloves were extra large Aris Lights, the largest size manufactured in that style. The same exact same style gloves that photographs showed Simpson previously wearing several different pairs of.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

We do not need Fung to tell us that dry blood does not appear shiny. Did it ever occur to you that the blankety blank MF did not wear his jacket, in order to cover up his unlawful conduct? Furman testified he saw "them". You can believe that he did not understand the question, but remember LE is trained how to testify. Others can speculate that he was lying as he admitted he would do.

He waited around to hear what the neighbors had seen. He would have only gone to jail if they could prove he planted the glove. The blankety blank was not concerned with whose blood it was; only planting evidence that would give Simpson complicity in the murders. He learned what Simpson had done and the last time he was seen from Kato, before going to plant the glove.

Fung did say that dried blood can have a sheen or a shine. If you think you know of any evidence that proves him false please post it. No it never occurred to me that Fuhrman didn't wear his jacket to cover up any unlawful conduct, it occurred to me that Bailey was speculating about something he didn't know very much about.

Fuhrman never said "they" referring to two gloves. He said "they" referring to two items of evidence, a glove and a hat that he saw under the plant at Bundy.

If I may I will tell you the same think you told 2. There is no evidence that there was more than one glove at Bundy and there is no evidence that Fuhrman planted any evidence in this case. If anyone states there is such evidence, then I will stand corrected, provided they post the evidence.

bobaugust

[martin II]

william

re; Rubin manipulating the gloves on the stand.

I am wondering if a judge would allow a plaintiff witness (Rubin)to stretch and manipulate EVIDENCE thereby changing the physical character of the EVIDENCE from its current or original condition when found and then allow the plaintiff to use this EVIDENCE as proof of anything in a demonstration.

martin II

[martin II]

Dear Limakey,

Perhaps, the most colossal blunder the prosecution made, other than the glove demonstration, was allowing Rubin to testify about his manipulation of the gloves. I wondered why JC did not object to the demonstration more vigorously. The question was not how the gloves would have fit if they were in a condition near to their original condition, but would the gloves fit him in the condition they were. His entire testimony was, imo, irrelevant, immaterial and superfluous to the issue. After his testimony, I realized how wise JC was. He trusted the jury to see the lengths the prosecution would go to in order to place Simpson's hands in those gloves. His manipulation of the gloves maligned his testimony and mutilated the prosecution's case, imo.


william
ruibin was a ex employee of the glove company that came to the prosecution as the glove expert for the purpose of becomming famous in this trial. He lied
about many aspects and could not, beyond a reasonable doubt prove that oj's hands would fit the gloves. His bias was evident when he asked do i get a invitaiton to the (prosecution) party.

martin II

[William Anthony]

Fung did say that dried blood can have a sheen or a shine. If you think you know of any evidence that proves him false please post it. No it never occurred to me that Fuhrman didn't wear his jacket to cover up any unlawful conduct, it occurred to me that Bailey was speculating about something he didn't know very much about.

Fuhrman never said "they" referring to two gloves. He said "they" referring to two items of evidence, a glove and a hat that he saw under the plant at Bundy.

If I may I will tell you the same think you told 2. There is no evidence that there was more than one glove at Bundy and there is no evidence that Fuhrman planted any evidence in this case. If anyone states there is such evidence, then I will stand corrected, provided they post the evidence.

bobaugust

I see and am delighted that you read and quote my posts. However, I was responding to her remark about standing corrected if any G said she was wrong. You and I had an agreement to engage in speculation, not to provide proof of our specualtions. Both Bailey and blankety blank were marines and Bailey knew how marined carried things. We have had the discussion and transcripts of the bankety blank's use of the word them. You can speculae that he was referring to two separate items and I can speculate that, as the transcript showed, he was speaking of two gloves. The problem is that you believe that he could have not planted the glove, because of the questions you posed from the work of fiction. However, no one ever considered that, he was planting the evidence, not to prove Simpson was the Killer, only that he was somehow involved. If Simpson had an airtight alibi, he could have said the killer came to kill Simpson, but when he fell into the wall and droped the glove and heard someone talking on the phone, the killer changed his mind. It was/could have been easy for the blankety blank MF to have planted the glove and avoided detection, as speculation shows he did.

[William Anthony]

Rubin didn't refurbish the gloves in the criminal trial, he did that in the civil trial. Before Simpson tried the gloves on over latex gloves they had been sitting in evidence for about a year.

The condition of the gloves doesn't mean anything. What matters is would those gloves fit Simpson. They were made to fit skin tight and the only way that skin tight gloves fit properly is if they are pulled on ones fingers. Simpson didn't do that because he didn't want them to fit. But if he had wanted them to fit they would have. Please don't tell me that Simpson actually fooled you? I thought you said you had some personal experience with expensive thin leather skin tight dress gloves?

These gloves were extra large Aris Lights, the largest size manufactured in that style. The same exact same style gloves that photographs showed Simpson previously wearing several different pairs of.

bobaugust

Rubin turned those gloves inside out and manipulated the lining in the criminal trial. I said manipulate not refurbish. The condition does mean something, because they were collected in that condition on the night of the murders and, the prosecution's theory was that they were worn by the murderer on that night. The condition they would have been in, when they were comparatively new, or less worn, meant nothing.

[William Anthony]

william

re; Rubin manipulating the gloves on the stand.

I am wondering if a judge would allow a plaintiff witness (Rubin)to stretch and manipulate EVIDENCE thereby changing the physical character of the EVIDENCE from its current or original condition when found and then allow the plaintiff to use this EVIDENCE as proof of anything in a demonstration.

martin II

No, that is why the chain of custody is required and the item is identified to be the item collected and untampered with, other than for testing, which is accounted for. The item should reflect the condition, as close to possible, as it was found; not what it would have looked like several years ago. A judge might allow it, but it is a serious appellate issue. If you are a defendant and I ask you to try on a pair of shoes and they did not fit, and, then I stretched them with a shoe stretcher and said they should fit now, do you think or anyone else that a judge should allow that. Martin, since this is your question, I think it would make an excellent new thread. Should Rubin have been allowed to manipulate the gloves?

[William Anthony]

After the case was assigned to Robbery Homicide, Philips as a West LA detective had neither the responsibility nor the authority to notify Simpson without approval from the Robbery Homicide detectives who were responsible for this case.

Lange asked both Phillips and Fuhrman to come to Rockingham with them because Fuhrman knew where Simpson's house was. Having someone lead them to the house was a lot faster than trying to find it on their own. Lange told Phillips that after they made the notification Phillips and Fuhrman could stay with Simpson and help him recover his two small children who were taken to their police station so that he and Vannatter could get back to the Bundy as quickly as possible. Lange thought they should be back in about twenty minutes or less. That plan was approved by Lange and Vannatter's supervisor.

The West LA detectives as well as the Robbery Homicide detectives didn't have any concern that Simpson could be another victim before they went to Rockingham. They had no reason to think that. It was only after how the situation developed at Rockingham that gave them that concern.

bobaugust


That is what you believe and I watched the testimony and is not what I believe. You like to use the words common sense. They could have sent anyone to make notification and it was not dependent on who was in charge.

[martin II]

The same exact same style gloves that photographs showed Simpson previously wearing several different pairs of.

bobaugust

bob

I thought nicole only baught two pairs of the gloves and she gave one pair to a friend so where did this 'SEVERAL DIFFERENT PAIRS OF' gloves come from.

[martin II]

see your pm
martin II

[martin II]

regardless of the level of quality control in the manufacturing process no two pair of any item with the same size tag is EXACTLY the same. It can be as much as a inch difference under the best circumstances especially since the gloves were sewn by a operator using a sewing machine.imo
martin ii

[ojisinnocent]

martin II, no I never argued what you think I argued. When Simpson scaled his fence there was thick shrubbery near the fence and thick hanging foliage over the top of the fence.

When Simpson made his interview tape that foliage had been all trimmed back revealing not only the bent wire but showing that there was nothing on the Salingers side of the fence that would have prevented Simpson from getting to the fence that some people tried to argue. Only foliage and shrubbery.

bobaugust


People:

All of you need to go to wagnerandson.com and read the sections "Petrocellie's Goofy Idea" and "petrocelli's goofy idea (part 2). BA's idaea of OJ jumign over the fence is totally destroyed, eaten for lunch, obliterati4ed. This is the most disgusting art of BA's whole theory, though not the only one.

BA is the type of guy who would say "All crows ore blck" and, when you put a white crow on a talbe in front of him will then say "All crows are black"..Not that that white bird is not a crow, mind you, or that you dyed the fow white, and certainly not admitting he is wrong. No, instead BA would look straight at the crow and waky, "What crow? Where?"

[bobaugust]

People:

All of you need to go to wagnerandson.com and read the sections "Petrocellie's Goofy Idea" and "petrocelli's goofy idea (part 2). BA's idaea of OJ jumign over the fence is totally destroyed, eaten for lunch, obliterati4ed. This is the most disgusting art of BA's whole theory, though not the only one.



John, anyone who reads what Wagner wrote will see for themselves that Wagner in no way destroys anything I've said here. Wagner used an old trick of attributing things to me that I never said and the proceeding to write how I was wrong. Wagner's arguments were based on why Simpson couldn't scale the fence at a different place than where he actually scaled it.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

I see and am delighted that you read and quote my posts. However, I was responding to her remark about standing corrected if any G said she was wrong. You and I had an agreement to engage in speculation, not to provide proof of our specualtions. Both Bailey and blankety blank were marines and Bailey knew how marined carried things. We have had the discussion and transcripts of the bankety blank's use of the word them. You can speculae that he was referring to two separate items and I can speculate that, as the transcript showed, he was speaking of two gloves. The problem is that you believe that he could have not planted the glove, because of the questions you posed from the work of fiction. However, no one ever considered that, he was planting the evidence, not to prove Simpson was the Killer, only that he was somehow involved. If Simpson had an airtight alibi, he could have said the killer came to kill Simpson, but when he fell into the wall and droped the glove and heard someone talking on the phone, the killer changed his mind. It was/could have been easy for the blankety blank MF to have planted the glove and avoided detection, as speculation shows he did.


As I understand it, we have an agreement to discuss this case courteously. That does not change the fact that speculation based on speculation based on speculation is certainty not as credible as speculation based on facts and evidence.

The difference is an unlikely possibility compared to a likely possibility.

The transcripts clearly show that Fuhrman was speaking about two pieces of evidence when he said "them" Before and after word both he and Uelmen, who was questioning him, were both referring to ONE glove not two.

The defense later took that word out of context and put their own meanings on it as to what they wanted it to mean. That is certainly not evidence of two gloves only evidence of how a dishonest tactic can be used to deceive and distort to fit false accusations. The same false accusations you keep repeating.

The questions I posed were not from a work of fiction. They were common sense questions from Petrocelli for people who have common sense and are capable of understanding how absurd and ridiculous the claim is that Fuhrman planted the glove. The claim that Fuhrman planted evidence is based solely on the fact that he was accused of being a rac-st and supposedly would be capable of doing anything. So people who believe that claim also believe every other claim about him no matter how unsupported, unsubstantiated, or absurd and ridiculous it is.

There is not one shred of real evidence to support the claim that glove was planted and there is no doubt that when Fuhrman said "them" he was referring to a glove and a hat, not two gloves.

July 5, Mark Fuhrman
Q FROM THAT VANTAGE POINT, LOOKING DOWN ON THE VICTIMS, WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE ANY ITEMS OF EVIDENCE?
A YES, LOOKING DOWN, DIRECTLY BELOW THE LANDING, THERE -- I BELIEVE AT THAT POINT THERE WAS A HEEL PRINT WHICH APPEARED TO BE GOING IN A WESTBOUND DIRECTION, AWAY FROM THE BODIES, TOWARDS THE ALLEY. THERE WAS ALSO A KNIT CAP OR WHAT
APPEARED TO BE A KNIT CAP, DARK CAP-TYPE OBJECT, AND WHAT LOOKED LIKE A GLOVE AT THE FEET OF THE MALE VICTIM IN THE SHRUBBERY AREA JUST TO THE NORTH OF THE FEMALE VICTIM.
Q CAN YOU DESCRIBE THE GLOVE ANY BETTER?
A AT THAT TIME, IT WAS DIFFICULT TO SEE IT. THERE WAS ANOTHER LOCATION FROM THE NORTH RESIDENCE THAT I GOT A BETTER VIEW OF IT, A LITTLE LATER. AND THEN I NOTICED THAT IT WAS A DARK BROWN -- OR IT COULD HAVE BEEN EVEN BLACK IN THE LIGHT THAT I WAS LOOKING AT IT -- AND IT DID APPEAR TO BE A STOCKING CAP WHEN I GOT A CLOSER LOOK.
Q SO IT WAS A -- IT LOOKED TO YOU TO BE A DARK BROWN OR EVEN BLACK LEATHER GLOVE, AND A -- DID YOU SAY WHAT COLOR THE HAT WAS?
A IT WAS VERY DARK. MAYBE DARK BLUE OR BLACK.
Q KNIT CAP?
A IT APPEARED TO BE KNIT, YES.
*
Q How far would you say you were from where the bodies were located?
A I was directly above the female victim, which was probably three feet. The male victim would have been ten feet, twelve feet.
Q All right.
And from that vantage point, you first observed the glove that you told us about?
A Not first, no.
Q When did you first observe it?
A We had flashlights. We were looking at the female victim. We looked at the male victim. I noticed the glove when I walked around to the -- after I exited the residence the first time and walked around to the side -- or the north side, north perimeter of 875 Bundy. There's an iron fence and through that iron fence you can get very close to the male victim. And looking there I could see them down at his feet.
Q All right.
The glove was located at the feet of the male
victim?
A Yes.
Q What --
A At the foot. At one of the feet.
Q Was it obscured by any sort of plant?
A There was a plant that kind of cascaded over the top of one portion of it, yes. That's why it was easier to see from that location to the north.

bobaugust

[deputydi]

We do not need Fung to tell us that dry blood does not appear shiny. Did it ever occur to you that the blankety blank MF did not wear his jacket, in order to cover up his unlawful conduct? Furman testified he saw "them". You can believe that he did not understand the question, but remember LE is trained how to testify. Others can speculate that he was lying as he admitted he would do.

He waited around to hear what the neighbors had seen. He would have only gone to jail if they could prove he planted the glove. The blankety blank was not concerned with whose blood it was; only planting evidence that would give Simpson complicity in the murders. He learned what Simpson had done and the last time he was seen from Kato, before going to plant the glove.
Just a suggestion, William. Your constant reference to Mark Fuhrman as that "blankety blank Furman" is a little childish and I'm sorry to say, it's also annoying.

How would planting the glove implicate OJ if MF didn't know it was OJs glove and he didn't know whose blood was on it. If all he wanted to do was give OJ complicity in the murders, he sure picked a risky way to do it.

[limakey]

Mr. August,

It was the DA's who made the request that Simpson put the latex gloves on the first place. There is not one reason why Simpson couldn't have been made to put the gloves back on, with the latex gloves off.

Latex gloves are nothing more then a very thin but reliable second skin. Other wise, why would be be worn by doctors and surgeons?

However, you still not have addressed the real issue, why did the DA's and the civil trial lawyers use a former salesman rather then a witness who could at least be put on the level of the defense's experts?

You also bring up another point----if Simpson had several pairs of the same type of gloves, why did the DA's only focus on gloves in a pictures? I would think that if they took several very similar types of gloves from Simpson's home, it would have been a lot more convincing then Mr. Rubin.

Another point, the DA's never knew what the defense was going to do about the gloves. The insides of the gloves was a mess because of the testing that was performed. Why didn't the DA's prepare those gloves to make sure that no reason could be given on why the gloves didn't fit?

Mr. August, just for the sake of argument---lets say that you found out that the gloves that were found at both crime scenes, that, in fact, they belong to some else, would that change your mind on who was wearing those gloves that night? Would that make you change your mind on what was found on them? I really can't see you conceding the point, that if the gloves were not OJ's, then that means he didn't wear them night, that his blood then had to planted on them. I just imagine you saying this............IMO

[jotun]

Coldwater locks Threads over at CTV if they go O/T. I am sure that the same rules that apply to CTV apply here at the Crime Library. If you don't agree, ask Freshwater.

It makes it easier for future reference when the Threads are started according to the subject matter and stay on subject and don't go O/T, especially if they end up on Page 2 or are Archived.



2--All:
Totally agree. Why have different threads if they are ALL THE SAME ???
Apparently the LOCK rule doesn't apply here.Wish some WATER would lock the threads if O/T. Never heard that before. Sure isn't practiced on the O.J.BOARD. Have been complaining about it since June.
Very frustrating.
jotun

[limakey]

Mr. August,

This where you run into problems on this issue.

You say they had no reason to suspect him---so why the delay on going over to Rockingham?

You say that they were sent there because of a very humane and valid reason, that they did not want Mr. Simpson to find out through the media.

However, where is this same humanity and concern for Sydney and Justin who were sitting a police station?

Also, you forget what each of the detectives testified about when they arrived at Bundy---all of them testified that they didn't know what they had, however, I believe some of them, testified that they thought is was possible, that because of brutality of the scene and the fame of OJ Simpson, that he could have been a victim as well.

Mr. August, I'm not questioning the reasons they went over there, I question their reasons for lying about it. They had at least three valid reasons for going over there, two backed up the laws they knew. The delay of going to Rockingham does not make sense because of their testimony and their actions.

A reality check here, Commander Bushey's job title, experience and responsibilities do not include compassion for the ex-spouse. His responsibility is to focus on solving the crime, not worring about the media. IMO.

[Big Ben]

Ben,

Has your group ever investigated why Steven Swab's was even open to cross regarding the time issue? It never made any sense that after the defense suggested that perhaps Swab was wrong, that the police who he encountered did not testify on what time their encounter happened.

I have often wondered on how cops just happened to be driving up the very street on which Nicole was killed? I also wonder why Westec just happened to be around the estate when the police needed them.

limakey, We didn't find out about the shocking, initial, 11:15 PM statement by Steven Schwab, about the sighting of the Akita, until we heard Marcia Clark speaking about it on the taped audio version of her first N.Y. Times best seller on the Simpson case. That was a couple of years after both trials had ended.

My group was under the gun, attempting to find a cause of action that would help further Simpson's appeal of the Santa Monica civil verdict, within the federal court system, with no time for nothing else. We felt that there was a Const. violation of Simpson's 7th Amendment rights in as much as the 7th Amendment requires that all civil trials conducted in the U.S. must be conducted in accordance with the Rules of (English) Common Law.

Our argument was that the Judge's use of Section 1.02 of the Cal. Book of Approved Jury Instructions, which forbid the jury its exclusive right and obligation to examine the actual Juditha Brown telephone records, constituted a major abuse of discretion, and willful abrogation of the exclusive rights of the "trier of fact" (jury), to determine Simpson's fate in the Santa Monica civil trial. Thus, depriving the civil jury the right to examine the Juditha Brown telephone records, was a mechanism to deprive Simpson of his Federally protected guarantees under the 7th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and deprived him of a fair trial in the civil court.

[Big Ben]

william

re; Rubin manipulating the gloves on the stand.

I am wondering if a judge would allow a plaintiff witness (Rubin)to stretch and manipulate EVIDENCE thereby changing the physical character of the EVIDENCE from its current or original condition when found and then allow the plaintiff to use this EVIDENCE as proof of anything in a demonstration.

martin II

Yeah! Judge bobaugust would. He doesn't have any problem with that.
The shoes to short for Simpson's feet? No Problem! Judge bobaugust's solution: Cut the toes out of the shoes and let the defendant wear them like house shoes to the gallows. Can't hold up a good hanging.

Gloves don't fit? Judge bobaugust's solution: Keep the lights down low, got to put his neck in the noose, you know.

Doesn't matter that everybody witnessing the execution may have on the same U2887 soles on 19 different pair of shoes, as long as the bottom of Simpson's feet are wearing U2887 SILGA shoe soles, adjusted to fit Simpson's extremely large feet by Judge bob, and ex-FBI scoundrel Bodziak, American justice will have been served.

[2L8 4A D8]

I have not taken ownership of any thread and only suggested how other topics may enter into a thread. It would appear that you are attempting to take control by telling posters what they should and should not post. The title of the thread does not change because other issues are on it and I fail to see how this would deter referencing of the thread. As I think you have an unnatural desire to be a moderator, I have considered the souce.

Get off of it! CTV doesn't hire Moderators from Posters on their Forums and you would know that if you had any ******!

Going Off Topic and bringing that fact to the Poster's attention is not "telling posters what they should and should not post." Sorry that you don't agree. You just don't want to have a paper trail following you that can be used against you later. Kinda like when Netta and Rayray (Martin) were caught lying in a couple of posts! :cuss:

JMO and MOO!!

Oh, and please give my regards to Talisman29!

[2L8 4A D8]

Bailey, as an ex-marine, during his questioning told of how marines carry items in bags and in their socks. This would also explain why the glove appeared wet/shinny when it was collected. It would have been easy for him at Bundy to dispose of the latex gloves he used to collect the glove, after placing the glove in a bag and inside his sock. Once gaining, imo, illegal entry into Simpson's estate, and hearing the statement of the thumps, he could have on his solo jouney to the dark area behind Kato's quarters to look for a suspect, without his weapon drawn, gotten laytex gloves from his inside his suit jacket pocket or other sock, or pants pocket, withdrawn the glove from the bag, planted it, placed the laytes gloves inside the bag and back into his socks. Speaking of socks, since the blankety blank wore a suit, it is reasonable to speculate that he wore dress socks. Were there any pictures taken of the blankety blanks ankles prior to his departure from Rockingham? That last question is made in jest, even if the speculation is not unreasonable.:)

Uh huh. Yeah, right! Next!

[2L8 4A D8]

People:

All of you need to go to wagnerandson.com and read the sections "Petrocellie's Goofy Idea" and "petrocelli's goofy idea (part 2). BA's idaea of OJ jumign over the fence is totally destroyed, eaten for lunch, obliterati4ed. This is the most disgusting art of BA's whole theory, though not the only one.

BA is the type of guy who would say "All crows ore blck" and, when you put a white crow on a talbe in front of him will then say "All crows are black"..Not that that white bird is not a crow, mind you, or that you dyed the fow white, and certainly not admitting he is wrong. No, instead BA would look straight at the crow and waky, "What crow? Where?"

Good Gawd! 8 misspellings in 2 paragraphs. You need to be doing a lot more than reading wagnerandson.com IMO!

[bobaugust]

william

re; Rubin manipulating the gloves on the stand.

I am wondering if a judge would allow a plaintiff witness (Rubin)to stretch and manipulate EVIDENCE thereby changing the physical character of the EVIDENCE from its current or original condition when found and then allow the plaintiff to use this EVIDENCE as proof of anything in a demonstration.

martin II

martin II, no one knows the original condition the gloves were in before the murders, only that they were old gloves. Stretching them would not change the size they were when they were manufactured and new. You're argument is ridiculous unless you are saying that the gloves could be stretched to a larger size then when they were manufactured or new. Is that what you're saying, martin?

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Rubin turned those gloves inside out and manipulated the lining in the criminal trial. I said manipulate not refurbish. The condition does mean something, because they were collected in that condition on the night of the murders and, the prosecution's theory was that they were worn by the murderer on that night. The condition they would have been in, when they were comparatively new, or less worn, meant nothing.

No one knows the condition the gloves were in before the murders, only that they were old gloves. The gloves were extra large the largest size manufactured in that style and the same exact style Simpson was shown in photographs to have previously worn.

The question was could Simpson have worn these skin tight extra large gloves? The answer is yes if he put them on properly and pulled them on his fingers as he would have to do with all skin tight gloves. And even then they still wouldn't have fit him like they did the night of the murders unless Simpson was wearing latex gloves underneath them at Bundy. Pulling them on ones fingers stretches the leather to make them fit better even when they were new and more so as they got older. In the demonstration Simpson never pulled them on to fit better because he didn't want them to look like they fit him.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

The same exact same style gloves that photographs showed Simpson previously wearing several different pairs of.

bobaugust

bob

I thought nicole only baught two pairs of the gloves and she gave one pair to a friend so where did this 'SEVERAL DIFFERENT PAIRS OF' gloves come from.

martin II, he either bought them, or someone else bought them and gave them to him. He evidently really liked them since they fit him skin tight and looked good.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Mr. August,

It was the DA's who made the request that Simpson put the latex gloves on the first place. There is not one reason why Simpson couldn't have been made to put the gloves back on, with the latex gloves off.

Latex gloves are nothing more then a very thin but reliable second skin. Other wise, why would be be worn by doctors and surgeons?

However, you still not have addressed the real issue, why did the DA's and the civil trial lawyers use a former salesman rather then a witness who could at least be put on the level of the defense's experts?

You also bring up another point----if Simpson had several pairs of the same type of gloves, why did the DA's only focus on gloves in a pictures? I would think that if they took several very similar types of gloves from Simpson's home, it would have been a lot more convincing then Mr. Rubin.

Another point, the DA's never knew what the defense was going to do about the gloves. The insides of the gloves was a mess because of the testing that was performed. Why didn't the DA's prepare those gloves to make sure that no reason could be given on why the gloves didn't fit?

Mr. August, just for the sake of argument---lets say that you found out that the gloves that were found at both crime scenes, that, in fact, they belong to some else, would that change your mind on who was wearing those gloves that night? Would that make you change your mind on what was found on them? I really can't see you conceding the point, that if the gloves were not OJ's, then that means he didn't wear them night, that his blood then had to planted on them. I just imagine you saying this............IMO


limakey, it was Simpson's defense attorneys who demanded that Simpson wear latex gloves on underneath or they would not let him try them on.

Richard Rubin had far superior knowledge about these gloves than the defense witness, MacDonell, who used new gloves to perform some home experiments on to compare to the killer's gloves when in fact the killer's gloves were old gloves, not new gloves.

The only gloves that were found in the search of Simpson house was a pair of Aris gloves but a different style than the killer's gloves.

I doubt if the defense would have allowed the prosecutors do do anything to the gloves since they didn't want them to fit Simpson. That's why the prosecutors planned to have Simpson try on a new pair of the exact same size and style Aris gloves as the killer's gloves. Simpson would not have had to wear latex gloves under them.

I am not going to answer meaningless hypothetical questions. The fact is that Simpson was shown in photographs previously wearing the exact make and style gloves the killer wore. The fact is that all of the blood, and fiber evidence found on the killer's gloves points to Simpson, not to anyone else.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

limakey, We didn't find out about the shocking, initial, 11:15 PM statement by Steven Schwab, about the sighting of the Akita, until we heard Marcia Clark speaking about it on the taped audio version of her first N.Y. Times best seller on the Simpson case. That was a couple of years after both trials had ended.

My group was under the gun, attempting to find a cause of action that would help further Simpson's appeal of the Santa Monica civil verdict, within the federal court system, with no time for nothing else. We felt that there was a Const. violation of Simpson's 7th Amendment rights in as much as the 7th Amendment requires that all civil trials conducted in the U.S. must be conducted in accordance with the Rules of (English) Common Law.

Our argument was that the Judge's use of Section 1.02 of the Cal. Book of Approved Jury Instructions, which forbid the jury its exclusive right and obligation to examine the actual Juditha Brown telephone records, constituted a major abuse of discretion, and willful abrogation of the exclusive rights of the "trier of fact" (jury), to determine Simpson's fate in the Santa Monica civil trial. Thus, depriving the civil jury the right to examine the Juditha Brown telephone records, was a mechanism to deprive Simpson of his Federally protected guarantees under the 7th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and deprived him of a fair trial in the civil court.

Big Ben, Marcia Clark may have only been estimating the 11:15 time because of the two time estimates Schwab told the police. Schwab testified as to what he told the police and why he called them to correct it. It's funny how you believe Marcia Clark about this but call her a liar and a criminal about everything else.

It may be your opinion that Simpson was deprived of a fair trial in the civil trial but not the opinion of any of Simpson's defense attorneys. Your opinion isn't very credible Big Ben, since every claim you have made about this has been shown to be false. If your group represented the opinions you have posted here, it's understandable why you never succeeded.

February 8, 1995 Steven Schwab
Q AND SO WHAT TIME WAS IT THAT YOU TOLD THE POLICE AT THAT TIME WHEN YOU WERE CONFUSED AND DISORIENTED -- WHAT TIME DID YOU TELL THE POLICE THAT YOU HAD GONE -- YOU HAD FOUND THE DOG?
A FIRST -- THE FIRST TIME THAT I MENTIONED WAS 11:30 AND THEN I SAID NO, IT WAS -- IT MUST HAVE BEEN AROUND 11:00. I WAS TRYING TO GET A FIX ON IT VAGUELY. AND AS I SAID, BETTINA AND SUKRU AND MY WIFE WERE THERE AND THERE WAS A LOT OF CROSSING AND CROSS TALKING GOING ON, YOU KNOW, NO, I SAW THEN, THAT KIND OF STUFF. SO I WASN'T CLEAR. BUT THOSE WERE THE TIMES I MENTIONED INITIALLY.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Mr. August,

A reality check here, Commander Bushey's job title, experience and responsibilities do not include compassion for the ex-spouse. His responsibility is to focus on solving the crime, not worring about the media. IMO.

limakey, you are being very naive. Commander Bushey wasn't thinking about Simpson's feelings or compassion for him when he gave that order. He was only thinking of Simpson's celebrity and how the media would attack the police allowing this beloved African American hero to find out his exwife had been murdered from the media.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

That is what you believe and I watched the testimony and is not what I believe. You like to use the words common sense. They could have sent anyone to make notification and it was not dependent on who was in charge.

You may have watched as well as I did but your memory for what was said is questionable. That's why the transcripts are so important.

bobaugust

[martin II]

martin II, he either bought them, or someone else bought them and gave them to him. He evidently really liked them since they fit him skin tight and looked good.

bobaugust

bob
so you believe oj had other brand name gloves that were not Aris light gloves. What does this have to do with the murder gloves in question?
Absolutely nothing. imo
So since you have no proof you say well, he either baught them or someone MUST have given them to him.

Whatr do you think the jury was suppose to do with this MUST HAVE piece of info.

martin II

[limakey]

Mr. August,

Wasn't it Marcia Clark who made this request after Chris Darden forced the demonstration? And there was nothing preventing the DA's for making Simpson take off the latex gloves and put the gloves back on.

Mr. Simpson's defense lawyers knew, they knew before Simpson even tried the gloves they weren't going to fit because they tried the gloves on. Shapiro and Cochran both said this in interviews.

And after the jurors and the media left the courtroom, Simpson did try the gloves on again, without the latex gloves and there was no change to the fit.

Since you refuse to answer the question, then you must feel if those gloves were not bought for Simpson, given to Simpson and owned by Simpson, then they can't possibly have been worn by Simpson to committ the murders. Interesting, very interesting.......

[limakey]

Mr. August,

You change you reasoning for the police's actions faster then the DA's and the civil trial lawyers changed the timeline!

First you say Commander Bushy's order was a humane one, to ensure Simpson didn't find out about the murders through the media.

Then you say that Commander Bushy knew Simpson was the prime suspect, knew because of the color of his skin that the media would attack his police force because of Mr. Simpson's fame.

Tell me where in Commander Bushy's job description his primary focus is to be on the media and the fame status of victims and/or suspects? Where is it written that when bodies are discovered and one of the victims is the spouse or ex-spouse of a celebrity, that celebrity status should be protected at all times? Where is the wavier that allows celebrity to over ride the rules of evidence, the stats, and every other routine procedure in conducting an investigation?

Where, prove that Commander Bushy was acting on a an established SOP? Prove it.

[martin II]

limakey

the width of oj's palm was just too wide to allow his fingers to fit into the glove. Darden got caught in some kind of macho argument with Bailey on this demonstration but he should have never made the demonstration if he did not know if the glove would fit or not. 101 lawyering.

After the glove did not fit Darden started yelling about how oj put them on but he had failed to examine ojs PALM. If he had he would have been informed as the defense was that the glove was much too small.
martin II

[limakey]

Martin,

Don't forget about the other "excuses" the media came up with the gloves not fitting----Simpson's lawyers told him to stop taking his medication so hands would swell up again--to make sure the gloves didn't fit.

[martin II]

Martin,

Don't forget about the other "excuses" the media came up with the gloves not fitting----Simpson's lawyers told him to stop taking his medication so hands would swell up again--to make sure the gloves didn't fit.


limakey
I bet when darden first started preparing for the glove demonstration some media thought, YES, they have caught oj dead to right and Darden had visions of being the hero of the trial. Some in the media then gave all kinds of
reasons they glove did not fit and blamed it on j.c. and o.j. others blamed it on darden. M Clarke the lead prosecutor received little blame although she was in charge of the team.imo
martin II

[martin II]

martin II, he either bought them, or someone else bought them and gave them to him. He evidently really liked them since they fit him skin tight and looked good.

bobaugust

bob
i would think oj had golf gloves --work gloves -football gloves --and other dress gloves. you cannot say because he owned other fitted gloves, that he owned and used the Airis gloves to murder his wife. gees.
martin II

[socaldiva]

*snip*
Oh, and please give my regards to Talisman29!

I see you & I think alike in this regard. Don't forget "Lionthrone" ;)

[martin II]

Good Gawd! 8 misspellings in 2 paragraphs. You need to be doing a lot more than reading wagnerandson.com IMO!

try to follow what the poster is saying instead of trying to be the spell checker. how about that?
martin II

[socaldiva]

try to follow what the poster is saying instead of trying to be the spell checker. how about that?
martin II

Kinda hard to follow if it doesn't make any sense.

[martin II]

Mr Rubin in his efforts to streatch the gloves, sat in court manipulating the gloves trying to "warm the gloves" in a effort to increase their size. The gloves were 'EVIDENCE". Should the judge have allowed this manipulation of the "evidence" in the civil trial. If so please explain why.
martin II

[bobaugust]

bob
so you believe oj had other brand name gloves that were not Aris light gloves. What does this have to do with the murder gloves in question?
Absolutely nothing. imo
So since you have no proof you say well, he either baught them or someone MUST have given them to him.

Whatr do you think the jury was suppose to do with this MUST HAVE piece of info.

martin II

martin II, All of the photographs showed Simpson wearing Aris Light gloves, the same exact make and style as the killer's gloves, some in black, some in brown.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

bob
i would think oj had golf gloves --work gloves -football gloves --and other dress gloves. you cannot say because he owned other fitted gloves, that he owned and used the Airis gloves to murder his wife. gees.
martin II

martin II, All of the photographs showed Simpson wearing Aris Light gloves, the same exact make and style as the killer's gloves, some in black, some in brown.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Mr. August,

You change you reasoning for the police's actions faster then the DA's and the civil trial lawyers changed the timeline!

First you say Commander Bushy's order was a humane one, to ensure Simpson didn't find out about the murders through the media.

Then you say that Commander Bushy knew Simpson was the prime suspect, knew because of the color of his skin that the media would attack his police force because of Mr. Simpson's fame.

Tell me where in Commander Bushy's job description his primary focus is to be on the media and the fame status of victims and/or suspects? Where is it written that when bodies are discovered and one of the victims is the spouse or ex-spouse of a celebrity, that celebrity status should be protected at all times? Where is the wavier that allows celebrity to over ride the rules of evidence, the stats, and every other routine procedure in conducting an investigation?

Where, prove that Commander Bushy was acting on a an established SOP? Prove it.

limakey, The notification was made for humane reasons as well as concerns about the media.

September 20, 1995
MS. CLARK: And who was in charge of that crime scene when you spoke to him at approximately 2:30 on the early morning hours of June 13th?
COMMANDER BUSHEY: He was, Detective Phillips.
MS. CLARK: And he--why did he call you?
COMMANDER BUSHEY: I was called as part of the notification process. Within the police department when certain things occur, certain notifications need to be made, and the instance of a particularly noteworthy crime, one that is likely to attract media attention, one of the things that takes place is the bureau is notified and I was the right person to notify.
MS. CLARK: Okay. So was that standard operating procedure then?
COMMANDER BUSHEY: Yes.

bobaugust

[2L8 4A D8]

try to follow what the poster is saying instead of trying to be the spell checker. how about that?
martin II

If you can't read it and you can't understand it, how in the h311 can you follow it SFB? I am sure that you got the message because you're just as bad as they are when it comes to spelling errors, etc. Duh!

JMO and MOO!!

[martin II]

I have noticed that you have problems with post from ngs that have no typos. so i do understand why you would have problems with a post exposing bob.
martinII

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally Posted by martin II

william

re; Rubin manipulating the gloves on the stand.

I am wondering if a judge would allow a plaintiff witness (Rubin)to stretch and manipulate EVIDENCE thereby changing the physical character of the EVIDENCE from its current or original condition when found and then allow the plaintiff to use this EVIDENCE as proof of anything in a demonstration.
martin II
Originally Posted by bobaugust

martin II, no one knows the original condition the gloves were in before the murders, only that they were old gloves. Stretching them would not change the size they were when they were manufactured and new. You're argument is ridiculous unless you are saying that the gloves could be stretched to a larger size then when they were manufactured or new. Is that what you're saying, martin?
bobaugust

Just thought that I would add these posts to start off your new Thread! :tongue:

JMO and MOO!!

[socaldiva]

I have noticed that you have problems with post from ngs that have no typos. so i do understand why you would have problems with a post exposing bob.
martinII

That rambling post didn't "expose" anything about Bob. I think you are confused again.

[2L8 4A D8]

That is what you believe and I watched the testimony and is not what I believe. You like to use the words common sense. They could have sent anyone to make notification and it was not dependent on who was in charge.

Oh, oh, don't tell me. Not only are you attending "college" to become a lawyer, but you also attended the Police Academy and that's how you know the procedures of the Police Department re: "notification!" :eek:

Yeah, right! GMAB! JMO and MOO!!

[jotun]

The same exact same style gloves that photographs showed Simpson previously wearing several different pairs of.

bobaugust

bob

I thought nicole only baught two pairs of the gloves and she gave one pair to a friend so where did this 'SEVERAL DIFFERENT PAIRS OF' gloves come from.

Martin,
Nicole bought 2 pair of gloves.Both pair were given to Tom McCollum.He turned them over to the da's and maybe the defence.Was in 'American Tragedy' Neither ever said anything about that. Many photos of O.J in gloves were shown on tv.Most bulky gloves not tight.Dress gloves all look similar,no matter the brand.
Doubt O.J.would wear those RAGGED-gloves.Have always believed they were Nicole's gardening gloves drying on that plant.
No KILLERS wore them!!!
We were told to believe that A killer dons a knit cap and gloves.Then somehow manages to leave them all behind. Makes no sence.

jotun

[limakey]

Martin,

I don't know if you saw the glove demo the first time it played out. IMO, the only one who was shocked that the gloves didn't fit was Darden. Marcia Clark kept her head down and away from the camera, she knew they weren't going to fit---IMO.

While I believe Chris Darden can whine better then a two year old, I must say that it was wrong that Clark didn't even suggest to him that the gloves might fit and it was wrong the way he was froze out after that, according to him. IMO.

[limakey]

Mr. August,

Your double talk is getting harder and harder to understand. You say no one knows the condition of the gloves were, accept they were old. If that is the case, then how do you know what size, as in measurements they were before the murders---or did all the shrinkage take place after the murders.

To say that the DA's witness was much better then the defense's witness is just fantasy on your part. The defense witness was an expert on these types of tests, his ability to make the money he charges is based on his reputation and skill.

And again Mr. August, where was the DA's expert on how blood, the freezing and unfreezing of the glove could have caused the shrinkage?

A major problem with the DA's case was that of their own witnesses. People who claimed they were professionals, yet were destroyed on the stand. It is a completely fair question to ask why the gloves, when they were collected and logged into the "murder book" were not measured. Yet, there is no way to prove that they weren't measured and that these measurements were never revealed or were lost---or they weren't written down.

[limakey]

William,

The defense had a huge advantage in this trial when it came to several evidence items and, IMO, they played it wisely. IMO, the defense knew the gloves weren't going to fit, they didn't anything else. Why bring up an issue that they didn't need? IMO.

[limakey]

Mr. August,

Again, since when do human acts and media concerns over ride a murder investigation? Commander Bushy had no obligation or duty to let these factors enter into his reasoning. His responsibilty was to the victims and at least one victim's children. IMO.

According to you, there was no wrong doing by the detectives or the cops, so why would Bushey be concerned about the media? And again, if it was for humane reason and Simpson wasn't a suspect, why the delay of going over there?

[2L8 4A D8]

I see you & I think alike in this regard. Don't forget "Lionthrone" ;)

:beer: Thanks for reminding me about that reincarnated nic Diva! LOL!

[bobaugust]

Mr. August,

Again, since when do human acts and media concerns over ride a murder investigation? Commander Bushy had no obligation or duty to let these factors enter into his reasoning. His responsibilty was to the victims and at least one victim's children. IMO.

According to you, there was no wrong doing by the detectives or the cops, so why would Bushey be concerned about the media? And again, if it was for humane reason and Simpson wasn't a suspect, why the delay of going over there?

limakey, As a commanding officer in the LAPD humane treatment and media perceptions were evidently part of Commander Bushey's responsibilities. Since the Rodney King incident the LAPD became very sensitive to how they were being perceived by the media.

I have already explained to you that the delay was based on the change of responsibility for the murders from the West LA division to Robbery Homicide. The Robbery Homicide detectives came up with a plan to make the notification shortly after they learned about the order to do so.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Martin,

I don't know if you saw the glove demo the first time it played out. IMO, the only one who was shocked that the gloves didn't fit was Darden. Marcia Clark kept her head down and away from the camera, she knew they weren't going to fit---IMO.

While I believe Chris Darden can whine better then a two year old, I must say that it was wrong that Clark didn't even suggest to him that the gloves might fit and it was wrong the way he was froze out after that, according to him. IMO.

limakey, in her book Clark wrote that she pleaded with Darden not to do it. They had originally planned to have Simpson try on a new pair of Aris Lights extra large because they knew that since the AIDS crisis, anything bloodstained required protection. They believed the court would never let anyone try on the bloody gloves without wearing latex beneath them. And latex would screw up the fit.

When the a cardboard box arrived in court with the duplicate gloves during Rubin's testimony, Darden was to establish the fact that they were exactly the same as the killer's glove, but he had never checked them out before. When he took them out of he box and showed them to Rubin, Rubin said that they were Aris gloves, but not Aris Lights. That's when Clark told Darden to forget it they could do it another time. Clark wrote Darden would not listen to her and believed he had to have Simpson put on the killer's gloves instead of letting the defense do it.

bobaugust

[William Anthony]

Oh, oh, don't tell me. Not only are you attending "college" to become a lawyer, but you also attended the Police Academy and that's how you know the procedures of the Police Department re: "notification!" :eek:

Yeah, right! GMAB! JMO and MOO!!

No, my dear

Just common sense. I do not think that it would specifically reqiure a detective or a detective on the case. I would think that they would have followed orders, instead of chewing the fat and doughnuts and washing them down with coffee, just mo, based on common sense.

[William Anthony]

You may have watched as well as I did but your memory for what was said is questionable. That's why the transcripts are so important.

bobaugust

I do not need to know what is said once, I have formed the opinion, that they are not telling the truth, and, as I recall, they offered sevral reasons for what remains, imho, an illegal search.

[William Anthony]

Just a suggestion, William. Your constant reference to Mark Fuhrman as that "blankety blank Furman" is a little childish and I'm sorry to say, it's also annoying.

How would planting the glove implicate OJ if MF didn't know it was OJs glove and he didn't know whose blood was on it. If all he wanted to do was give OJ complicity in the murders, he sure picked a risky way to do it.

I am sorry that my reference to the MF annoys you. However, his actions and words annoy me. I suppose that we will have to live with the annoyance.
To espouse a theory that a race of people should be burned, is ridiculous and past childish, imh&ro. Complicity can mean accessory, solicitation, conspiracy. He could have suggested that the glove was dropped by the killer, who wanted to notify Simpson that the job was done, or show evidence that Simpson was present, if not directly involved in the killings? The fact that a glove that allegedly matched the one at the scene of the murders, despite whose blood was only it, is suspicious enough to incriminate Simpson as to having some involvement in the crime.

[William Anthony]

Get off of it! CTV doesn't hire Moderators from Posters on their Forums and you would know that if you had any ******!

Going Off Topic and bringing that fact to the Poster's attention is not "telling posters what they should and should not post." Sorry that you don't agree. You just don't want to have a paper trail following you that can be used against you later. Kinda like when Netta and Rayray (Martin) were caught lying in a couple of posts! :cuss:

JMO and MOO!!

Oh, and please give my regards to Talisman29!

Well, if you know that they do not hire from posters, why do you continue to waste your time applying, imho&ro.

[William Anthony]

Just thought that I would add these posts to start off your new Thread! :tongue:

JMO and MOO!!

Originally Posted by bobaugust

martin II, no one knows the original condition the gloves were in before the murders, only that they were old gloves. Stretching them would not change the size they were when they were manufactured and new. You're argument is ridiculous unless you are saying that the gloves could be stretched to a larger size then when they were manufactured or new. Is that what you're saying, martin?
bobaugust

Just thought that I would add these posts to start off your new Thread!

Again, Martin,

They did not find new gloves. They collected the gloves in the condition they were presented to Simpson to try on. There was no point to, and, imo, should not have been allowed, Rubin's manipulation. The point was not whether he ever owned a new pair of gloves that would have fit him; but whether the evidence gloves, in the condition they were collected, would have fit him on the night of the murders. Whether he was the killer or not, Rubin's unlawful demonstration represented the desperateness of the prosecution's

[martin II]

william

Rubin could not have been on the stand when he manipulated the glove because this would mean that the judge allowed this activity.imo
martin II

[William Anthony]

william

Rubin could not have been on the stand when he manipulated the glove because this would mean that the judge allowed this activity.imo
martin II

As I recall the testimony, he either manipulated them or told how he did from the stand. In etither event, the neither the demonstration or testimony should have been allowed, imho. I do not remember if the defense objected to it.

[William Anthony]

William,

The defense had a huge advantage in this trial when it came to several evidence items and, IMO, they played it wisely. IMO, the defense knew the gloves weren't going to fit, they didn't anything else. Why bring up an issue that they didn't need? IMO.


Dear Limakey,

As usual you and I have found a point of agreement. JC was a master of the courtroom, and the prosecutors were his puppets.

[Kayleighjo]

As I recall the testimony, he either manipulated them or told how he did from the stand. In etither event, the neither the demonstration or testimony should have been allowed, imho. I do not remember if the defense objected to it.

He was on the stand.

Manipulated the gloves? Come on, the condition the gloves were in when collected would not be the same condition as they were in during the course of the trial or did you miss all of the testimony on this point?

[2L8 4A D8]

No, my dear

Just common sense. I do not think that it would specifically reqiure a detective or a detective on the case. I would think that they would have followed orders, instead of chewing the fat and doughnuts and washing them down with coffee, just mo, based on common sense.

Oh, now you say that "I would think that they would have followed orders..." That isn't what you said in your original post! JMO and MOO!!


Originally Posted by William Anthony
That is what you believe and I watched the testimony and is not what I believe. You like to use the words common sense. They could have sent anyone to make notification and it was not dependent on who was in charge.
Make up your mind!

[martin II]

if rubin was on the stand when he as bob says "manipulated and wormed the gloves", this means that the judge allowed him manipulate the 'EVIDENCE' in the court. Does this happen frequently with evidence or was this unique to the civil trial.
martin II

[2L8 4A D8]

Dear Limakey,

As usual you and I have found a point of agreement. JC was a master of the courtroom, and the prosecutors were his puppets.

Yeah, JC sure was because he also bamboozled all of you NG's into his puppets too! :eek:

JMO and MOO!!

[William Anthony]

Yeah, JC sure was because he also bamboozled all of you NG's into his puppets too! :eek:

JMO and MOO!!

I have never stated that Simpson is innocent. I admire the strategy that JC used and his ability to control a courtroom. I can only recall one or two times when he showed how upset he was during the trial and, even, when engaged in heated discussions, conducted himself with a modicum of professionalism that was admirable and which I want to learn

[William Anthony]

Oh, now you say that "I would think that they would have followed orders..." That isn't what you said in your original post! JMO and MOO!!

[/i][/b]
Make up your mind!

They could have followed orders or delegated the responsibility, instead of taking a delegation. :)

[socaldiva]

*snip*
I am sorry that my reference to the MF annoys you. However, his actions and words annoy me. I suppose that we will have to live with the annoyance.


Why do we have to "live with the annoyance"? Aren't you able to control what you post? Your adjectives for Fuhrman are repetitive, redundant & boring at this point.

[bobaugust]

I do not need to know what is said once, I have formed the opinion, that they are not telling the truth, and, as I recall, they offered sevral reasons for what remains, imho, an illegal search.

Actually what you think was said once. Unfortunately you have been shown to be wrong about many things you think you remembered what was said.

bobaugust

[Kate Sachel]

Kate,

I think that he did receive favorable treatment from some of LE. Given the fact that Furman had been involved in one incident of spousal abuse and Simpson was the ex, he became an immediate suspect. If he did not become a suspect at that time, then Furman is a lousier detective than I think him to be. I think that Simpson was wrong in believing he had favorable relations with LE: it was more of a quid pro quo situation, imo. Shipp made the nature of their relationship obvious on the stand, imo. People often are confused about the nature of relationships and sometimes need to have the nature defined, imo.

If I am correct, Furman only observed one drop of blood on the Bronco, and, imho, that would not have been enough to say there was another possible victim. If they believed him to be a suspect, given the delay in their arrival time, the evidence would have most likely been destroyed by then. I honestly believe that he was a suspect and, when they did not get an answer thought he fled, and created a reason to justify their unlawful entry onto his estate.

I don't believe that the one drop blankets the entire reasoning behind why they may have assumed there was another victim inside. The detectives were told by the alarm company that someone should have been home. Given the murder of OJ Simpson's ex-wife, blood on his vehicle, and no one answering a door when someone should have been home is valid reason for alarm in my opinion.

Kate

[Kate Sachel]

Kate,

Here is the problem of the "star struck" or the "love fest with OJ" theory. Everday "fans" of OJ Simpson or any superstar for that matter, have the luxury of being able to say, "he would never do this", "it makes no sense, he had it all"---the police on the other hand do not have this luxury. With their experience and in the area where they performed their jobs, they have seen it all. Every cop and detective knowthat domestic violence or crimes of passion, or just about any crime has no color borders, has no gender borders, has no wealth borders. And while personally these same cops and detectives might be wishing with all their might that they didn't even have to consider this person a prime suspect, it is their job.

I also find it impossible to believe that this same star would still have the same cop and detective "fans" after they arrive at the scene and see what these officers saw. IMO.

We hear stories all of the time regarding how LE allows celebrities to break the law or "get away" with things that normal civilians do not.

Vanatter made the statement that "a domestic call from ten years ago sure doesn't add up to what we saw at Bundy". That tells me that he was not finding a connection between the call that Fuhrman responded to in 1985 and Nicole's murder. I believe the comment indicated that he was not believing that OJ Simpson was a killer right away.

Kate

[William Anthony]

I don't believe that the one drop blankets the entire reasoning behind why they may have assumed there was another victim inside. The detectives were told by the alarm company that someone should have been home. Given the murder of OJ Simpson's ex-wife, blood on his vehicle, and no one answering a door when someone should have been home is valid reason for alarm in my opinion.

Kate

It is not uncommon for people to be out and I do not know the habits of Simpson as to informing the alarm company about his, his family’s or his employee's whereabouts. Given that the drop had not been identified as blood, the whole thing does not add up to probable cause to justify the entry, therefore, the need to create exigent circumstances. Is their explanation plausible, yes? Did it ring true to me, no. As I watched them explain their reason for the entry, did I find them credible, no. Alarm is one thing, violating rights granted by case law, not the Constitution (as I misspoke) is another.

[William Anthony]

Why do we have to "live with the annoyance"? Aren't you able to control what you post? Your adjectives for Fuhrman are repetitive, redundant & boring at this point.

Was he able to control his tongue? I like what I post and am not posting for your approval.

[2L8 4A D8]

I have never stated that Simpson is innocent. I admire the strategy that JC used and his ability to control a courtroom. I can only recall one or two times when he showed how upset he was during the trial and, even, when engaged in heated discussions, conducted himself with a modicum of professionalism that was admirable and which I want to learn

You don't have to because you are constantly shoving that down our throats. However, as far as I am concerned (and I am sure others would agree) you do THINK that OJ is INNOCENT just as much as all of the other NG's on this Board do! JC is not an admirable role model IMO. JC knew that OJ was guilty and he played dirty and played the race card to get him off. It doesn't surprise me that you want to learn from him! :rolleyes:

JMO and MOO!!

[2L8 4A D8]

They could have followed orders or delegated the responsibility, instead of taking a delegation. :)

Oh yeah and if they did that, it could be considered "insubordination" which is grounds for termination IIRC! :rolleyes:

JMO and MOO!!

[William Anthony]

Oh yeah and if they did that, it could be considered "insubordination" which is grounds for termation IIRC! :rolleyes:

JMO and MOO!!

And if they drank coffee and ate doughnuts and talked about planting/fabricating/tampering with evidence or otherwise ignored the order, what would that have been, iyo?

[2L8 4A D8]

Was he able to control his tongue? I like what I post and am not posting for your approval.

No, just Kate's! :rolleyes:

[fbgweezer]

Why do we have to "live with the annoyance"? Aren't you able to control what you post? Your adjectives for Fuhrman are repetitive, redundant & boring at this point. there is evidence that orenthal butchered two people and they're going to give him the benefit of reasonable doubt and defend his right to walk around a free man -- there is no proof that Fuhrman did not do any of the stuff he talked about on the screenplay tapes, but we're going to persecute him. Go figure.

[fbgweezer]

And if they drank coffee and ate doughnuts and talked about planting/fabricating/tampering with evidence or otherwise ignored the order, what would that have been, iyo?
you keep repeating this post -- where in the world are you coming up with this scenario?

[2L8 4A D8]

And if they drank coffee and ate doughnuts and talked about planting/fabricating/tampering with evidence or otherwise ignored the order, what would that have been, iyo?

The above is nothing but your ridiculous imagination, coupled with your hatred and distrust of LE and the LAPD IMO! :rolleyes:

[William Anthony]

No, just Kate's! :rolleyes:

No, I do not post for anyone's approval other than the moderators. I will conduct myself in a fashion in which Kate conducts herself. We have had our disagreements, through misunderstanding. She has been civil to me and I have been likewise civil to her. It is something called human decency and respect. I did not have to earn it, she gave it and I gave her mine and she has proven to deserve it. You seem to misconstrue a lot of things, imho.

[William Anthony]

You don't have to because you are constantly shoving that down our throats. However, as far as I am concerned (and I am sure others would agree) you do THINK that OJ is INNOCENT just as much as all of the other NG's on this Board do! JC is not an admirable role model IMO. JC knew that OJ was guilty and he played dirty and played the race card to get him off. It doesn't surprise me that you want to learn from him! :rolleyes:

JMO and MOO!!

I am perfectly capable of saying what I mean. Your opiinion seems to stem not for your opinion of JC's performance as it does from the fact that he was successful, imho.

[William Anthony]

The above is nothing but your ridiculous imagination, coupled with your hatred and distrust of LE and the LAPD IMO! :rolleyes:


You still did not answer the question!!!

[William Anthony]

The above is nothing but your ridiculous imagination, coupled with your hatred and distrust of LE and the LAPD IMO! :rolleyes:

Forget the first part. What do you think about them ignoring the orders?

[2L8 4A D8]

No, I do not post for anyone's approval other than the moderators. I will conduct myself in a fashion in which Kate conducts herself. We have had our disagreements, through misunderstanding. She has been civil to me and I have been likewise civil to her. It is something called human decency and respect. I did not have to earn it, she gave it and I gave her mine and she has proven to deserve it. You seem to misconstrue a lot of things, imho.

You know who's *** to **** and that's exactly what you've did and done ~ since Day 1. This is just another pre-requisite of becoming a defense attorney.

You must be a whiz at "college!" You've been on these Boards 24/7 and still were able to study for finals. Yeah, right! :rolleyes:

JMO and MOO!!

[2L8 4A D8]

I am perfectly capable of saying what I mean. Your opiinion seems to stem not for your opinion of JC's performance as it does from the fact that he was successful, imho.

There you go again, putting words in my mouth. My opinions state no such thing and you know it! You are the ONE that thinks JC is/was successful, not me! :rolleyes:

JMO and MOO!!

[2L8 4A D8]

:punch: I am not interested in answering your baiting questions nor playing your baiting games! Go back to the sandbox and play with Martin. He's so lonesome without you!

JMO and MOO!!

[socaldiva]

*snip*
You must be a whiz at "college!" You've been on these Boards 24/7 and still were able to study for finals. Yeah, right! :rolleyes:


I know what you mean. I didn't realize that studying law only required an hour or so a day of study/attendance. :biggrin:

[sassylassy]

No, I do not post for anyone's approval other than the moderators. I will conduct myself in a fashion in which Kate conducts herself. We have had our disagreements, through misunderstanding. She has been civil to me and I have been likewise civil to her. It is something called human decency and respect. I did not have to earn it, she gave it and I gave her mine and she has proven to deserve it. You seem to misconstrue a lot of things, imho.

I must say->I think you and kate are 2 of the best posters here.you are always respectful to everyone even under fire.:beer: i enjoy reading what u both add to the simpson thread.

[socaldiva]

Was he able to control his tongue? I like what I post and am not posting for your approval.

Yes he was able to "hold his tongue" & I find him to be quite articulate. He was speaking relative to a screenplay, but I guess you don't understand that no matter how many times you are told. Even Orenthal said "who cares if he used the n word" whilst driving around with that guy that was filming him & I've never heard Orenthal say that MF planted anything. During the Bronco ride he apologized to the officer he was speaking to & basically said they treated him well IIRC. I guess you missed that too. He only came up with the police misconduct, police conspiracy theory when it was spoon fed to him by lawyers that knew it was his only way out of murder that he obviously carried out. I guess you also missed the other poster that said your MF adjectives are tiring & childish.

[bobaugust]

Forget the first part. What do you think about them ignoring the orders?

Who do you think ignored an order?

bobaugust

[2L8 4A D8]

I know what you mean. I didn't realize that studying law only required an hour or so a day of study/attendance. :biggrin:

:beer: Right on Diva! IMO, if that's all it takes maybe we should ALL become attorneys! LOL! I admire Vince Bugliosi and I would want to be just like him!

[limakey]

Mr. August,

You can't be serious! The AIDS crisis? Are you kidding me? Marcia Clard didn't plead with Darden because, IMO, in order to plead, you have to tell the truth. When does she say to him, "Chris, they aren't going to fit?"

In fact, saying that they would do it later or let the defense do it makes no sense if you are telling this jury that those gloves are in fact, OJ Simpson's. No, again, Clark played games with her co-counsel, a co-counsel who was really getting it from all insides, however, as much as I think Chris Darden was a whiner, I do believe that he was truly tormented over this case.

By allowing Darden to do the demonstration, she was the one who put the final nail in Darden's coffin in the eyes of many people---of all races. And really, Mr. August, when did Clark take responsibililty for anything in that trial?

[limakey]

2Late,

Prove that JC thought OJ was guilty while he was representing him? JC was no different then many lawyers who interviewed in the early stages of the trial. When the story was leaked that Simpson's blood was found at the scene, most lawyers declared the case was over. However, that was before Simpson assembled his full team, that was before the problems of evidence were known. In fact, the former Attorney General for the US declared Simpson guilty before the prelim hearing was over.

When Mr. Simpson died, his daughter said that he always believed Simpson was innocent. When he was on Catherine Crier Live, he made a statement that he was something like 95% sure Simpson was innocent, but, as he stated, he wasn't there that night and neither was she. He also made the comment that he felt that there were two killers, which there are legal G commentators who also feel one person could not have done this alone. At least get rid of the evidence.

The only lawyer that I know of that was said to have doubts about Simpson's innocence was Robert Shapiro.

[limakey]

Kate,

I do agree with you that many celebrities are allowed to get away things that non-celebrities wouldn't. A perfect example is how many young stars are pictured in bars well before they reach the legal age to drink. However, we are not talking about these seemingly "petty" crimes.

As for Vanatter, IMO, I believe he had a lot of problems with the evidence and with Mark Fuhrman. If you read Mark Fuhrman's book, IMO, he proves this over and over again while he is slamming Vanatter and Lange. Perfect example, Fuhrman says that he had to make decisions based on his experience and the apparent lack of response he got from Vanatter, namely when impounding the Bronco. He claims that he ordered the Bronco to be sealed off and impounded, Vanatter when over him and stopped this.

Another point, there was more then enough time for Vanatter to have been told that there was at least one more 911 phone call regarding the Simpsons.

Last point, I think it is fair to say that no detective would have been at fault for believing that his was a crime passion. The way the inside of the condo was, the way that Nicole was dressed and that there was another man who had come to see Nicole.

Kate, you have done a lot of research on this subject and I would think that many people would be surprised by how many domestic murders take place when there is no history of actual physical abuse. However, emotional abuse is another story--emotional abuse is often a trigger for many of these types of murders.

Detective Vanatter as well as the other detectives know this.

[2L8 4A D8]

I am perfectly capable of saying what I mean. Your opiinion seems to stem not for your opinion of JC's performance as it does from the fact that he was successful, imho.

Successful isn't the word that I would use to describe JC! If JC had played fair and not played dirty, then I would agree with you. But he didn't. That's why I posted that it doesn't surprise me that you want to "learn" from him. I just consider the source and that Birds of a Feather, Flock Together!

JMO and MOO!!

[bobaugust]

Mr. August,

You can't be serious! The AIDS crisis? Are you kidding me? Marcia Clard didn't plead with Darden because, IMO, in order to plead, you have to tell the truth. When does she say to him, "Chris, they aren't going to fit?"

In fact, saying that they would do it later or let the defense do it makes no sense if you are telling this jury that those gloves are in fact, OJ Simpson's. No, again, Clark played games with her co-counsel, a co-counsel who was really getting it from all insides, however, as much as I think Chris Darden was a whiner, I do believe that he was truly tormented over this case.

By allowing Darden to do the demonstration, she was the one who put the final nail in Darden's coffin in the eyes of many people---of all races. And really, Mr. August, when did Clark take responsibililty for anything in that trial?

limakey, I don't know how old you are but back in the nineties the AIDS crisis was a big deal and it was understood that it could be spread by coming in contact with infected blood. That's the reason Simpson wore latex gloves underneath the bloody gloves.

Clark knew that latex gloves would affect the fit and that if they let Simpson try on the bloody gloves no one could have kept him from pulling the shenanigans that he did. Simpson splayed his hands like a two year old to keep the gloves from being pulled down over his fingers. The only people he fooled were very gullible people, evidently like you.

Clark warned Darden and told him not to do it but she couldn't dissuade him. He was determined telling her Rubin was his witness not hers.

bobaugust

[2L8 4A D8]

2Late,

Prove that JC thought OJ was guilty while he was representing him? JC was no different then many lawyers who interviewed in the early stages of the trial. When the story was leaked that Simpson's blood was found at the scene, most lawyers declared the case was over. However, that was before Simpson assembled his full team, that was before the problems of evidence were known. In fact, the former Attorney General for the US declared Simpson guilty before the prelim hearing was over.

When Mr. Simpson died, his daughter said that he always believed Simpson was innocent. When he was on Catherine Crier Live, he made a statement that he was something like 95% sure Simpson was innocent, but, as he stated, he wasn't there that night and neither was she. He also made the comment that he felt that there were two killers, which there are legal G commentators who also feel one person could not have done this alone. At least get rid of the evidence.

The only lawyer that I know of that was said to have doubts about Simpson's innocence was Robert Shapiro.

That is your opinion. I stand by my post, which is my opinion. I don't have to "prove" anything to you. In fact, Kate, Bob and Tazzy (to name a few) have repeatedly asked you to "prove" things and they are still waiting for your answers to this day. Or have you conveniently forgotten about those requests? :rolleyes:

JMO and MOO!!

[William Anthony]

Successful isn't the word that I would use to describe JC! If JC had played fair and not played dirty, then I would agree with you. But he didn't. That's why I posted that it doesn't surprise me that you want to "learn" from him. I just consider the source and that Birds of a Feather, Flock Together!

JMO and MOO!!

The court system is not the forum for deciding what is fair, except theoretically in a suit in equity. The system is designed to bring a resolution to disputes based on the ability of the adversaries to meet their respective burdens of production and persuasion. The concept of playing dirty does not enter into it. If he had done something unlawful, then I could understand. However, since he did not, I fail to understand your post.

[William Anthony]

Forget the first part. What do you think about them ignoring the orders?

Typical!!! Cannot answer, call it baiting, imh&ro.

[William Anthony]

Who do you think ignored an order?

bobaugust

Here is your post;

"There was no reason for Commander Bushey to lie. He explained why he gave that order to Phillips and when the case was turned over to Robbery Homicide he testified he reiterated his order that Simpson be notified as soon as possible."

Thus, it made no difference which LE department was in charge. The commander gave an order, which was not obey and he had to reiterate that order.

[William Anthony]

He was on the stand.

Manipulated the gloves? Come on, the condition the gloves were in when collected would not be the same condition as they were in during the course of the trial or did you miss all of the testimony on this point?

Then there is addition reasons not to allow the testimony, as the evidence did not reflect the conditon it was in when collected, unless he had some manner of restoring them to that condition. He testified to shrinkage, but had no way of knowing what these gloves had undergone, prior to the murders. His entire testimony was a sham and the jury picked up on it, imho.

[martin II]

Then there is addition reasons not to allow the testimony, as the evidence did not reflect the conditon it was in when collected, unless he had some manner of restoring them to that condition. He