Evidence that Places OJ Simpson at the Crime Scene

[nettathirty]

The hearing, whose larger purpose is to determine whether there is enough of a case against Mr. Simpson to try him on murder charges, began with testimony by a clerk at a downtown Los Angeles cutlery store who said Mr. Simpson bought a 15-inch knife there on May 3. [Page A20.]

The authorities, who have not found a murder weapon, say they believe that a knife similar to the one bought by Mr. Simpson was used to kill Mrs. Simpson and a friend of hers, Ronald L. Goldman, at her town house here, about two miles from Mr. Simpson's home.

http://classes.colgate.edu/rbowman/core145/OJ_Search_Articles.htm[/url] [/B][/QUOTE]

August,

You believe the knife purchased from Ross Cutler wasn't the murder weapon, but a swiss army knife with a much smaller blade was... correct?

Then can you explain why the Cops felt differently?

[martin II]

based on what these cops did at oj's house, le could come to bob's house ring the bell and call on the phone and receive no answer. they could then look at a car parked in front of the house on the street and see what they thought was a very tiny blood stain and then decide to just illegally go through the nearist window and search the house.

bob would say no harm done.

martin II

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by socaldiva
Way to go Netta. You mock me for putting this link up on another thread, yet you use it here for some of your twist & spin :lol:


Socal,

Obscure view of everyone who does not agree with your position on the Simpson case.. I was actually giving you a compliment, hint "Kudo's"..

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II
based on what these cops did at oj's house, le could come to bob's house ring the bell and call on the phone and receive no answer. they could then look at a car parked in front of the house on the street and see what they thought was a very tiny blood stain and then decide to just illegally go through the nearist window and search the house.

bob would say no harm done.

martin II


martin II, your premise is false.

The police never entered Simpson's house through a window, Simpson's daughter opened the door and let them in. The police never searched the inside of the house until they received a search warrant.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, your premise is false.

The police never entered Simpson's house through a window, Simpson's daughter opened the door and let them in. The police never searched the inside of the house until they received a search warrant.

bobaugust

bob
read my post again. the referance to going in a window was only a example of what could happen at YOUR house if le suspected you of being involved in a crime and wanted to violate your rights.
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


bob
read my post again. the referance to going in a window was only a example of what could happen at YOUR house if le suspected you of being involved in a crime and wanted to violate your rights.
martin II


martin II, I'm sorry your scenario was not a direct comparison to what the police did at Rockingham. It was a different hypothetical and meaningless to any discussion about the Simpson case.

bobaugust

[limakey]

Martin,

When it comes the phone message left by Paula, do you believe that the DA's didn't know about the message from Paula? It makes no sense to me that they would check his cell phone records, any calls from his home and not know that he had an answering service.

And as you know, a lot of "tips" have been given for the money. It other words, what is the possibility that some one could have told the DA's about the message, but would not testify about it in court?

IMO, the DA's knew about his phone call and again, they knew it would help OJ more then hurt him. IMO.

[martin II]

Originally posted by limakey
Martin,

When it comes the phone message left by Paula, do you believe that the DA's didn't know about the message from Paula? It makes no sense to me that they would check his cell phone records, any calls from his home and not know that he had an answering service.

And as you know, a lot of "tips" have been given for the money. It other words, what is the possibility that some one could have told the DA's about the message, but would not testify about it in court?

IMO, the DA's knew about his phone call and again, they knew it would help OJ more then hurt him. IMO.

limakey

i think the da knew about paula. in the lapd interivew oj , there was talk about oj calling paula with plans to go to her house.

so i don't believe they did not check his cell phone and answering
service. their standing rule seems to be, if it is the truth and in anyway helps the defendant don't talk about it.imo
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


limakey

i think the da knew about paula. in the lapd interivew oj , there was talk about oj calling paula with plans to go to her house.

so i don't believe they did not check his cell phone and answering
service. their standing rule seems to be, if it is the truth and in anyway helps the defendant don't talk about it.imo
martin II the more we discuss paula and her dump message, the more I become convinced that she knew she was covering up and lying for orenthal and cochran had to have known it also.

[limakey]

Martin,

I read part of that New York Times story--did anything jump out at you?

Like, Vanatter suspecting that the Simpsons, both of them could have been the victims of a stalker--how could he possibly have ruled that out at that time?

Also, never did the 4 detectives who went to Rockingham express any type of "relief" that OJ was safely in Chicago. Ron Phillilps never expressed any words to support this when he told OJ about Nicole.

Also, what Fuhrman said, "I finally found what I was looking for". Why was he looking for bloody glove behind Kato's wall? And again, at that time, did they do a search of the area, like maybe the prep had passed out do the injuries they have may have suffered in the murders?

With that statement, Fuhrman finally proves that OJ Simpson was a suspect well before the time was given by the LAPD. No one had no idea who's blood could have been on that glove.

During Lange and Vanatter's interview, they never asked him who he thought might have or could have done this? I don't remember.

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by limakey

<snipped>

Also, what Fuhrman said, "I finally found what I was looking for". Why was he looking for bloody glove behind Kato's wall? And again, at that time, did they do a search of the area, like maybe the prep had passed out do the injuries they have may have suffered in the murders?

It's funny how people can interpret things differently. I take, "I finally found what I was looking for" to mean that MF knew there was a Glove that was missing at Bundy and "he found it!" Where you take it to mean, "Why was he looking for bloody glove behind Kato's wall?"

With that statement, Fuhrman finally proves that OJ Simpson was a suspect well before the time was given by the LAPD. No one had no idea who's blood could have been on that glove.

Not necessarily. Get real! MF was talking about the "glove" NOT "OJ Simpson was a suspect well before the time was given by the LAPD."

We have ALL discussed this ad nauseum! When are you finally going to "get it?" How many times does it have "to be discussed" before you finally STHU or concede that the evidence as presented is correct?

JMO and MOO!!

<snipped>

[martin II]

limakey

It is my opinion that when furhman realized that the victim was Niole Simpson early on at bundy and considering that he personally had prior knowledge of some reports of abuse between Nicol and OJ, He would as most le would , SUSPECT THE EX WAS INVOLVED and that he would have relayed his thoughts to the other detectives at that time.

this would account for why four detectives went to rockingham. why furhman (having been taken off the case) went also. why furhman agreed to jump the fense without a search warrant. why furhman started searching the bronco, and why he took it on himself and by himself ,to search the walkway without a search warrant or assistance from other detectives at rockingham.

after kato told them about the knocks, it seems that furhman would have asked vanhatter to come with me to investigate and see if anyone is in the walkway. but he didn't

i do believe that all four had oj as a suspect when they went to rockingham. imo
martin II

[Heyes]

Originally posted by socaldiva


You're still posting this even though you've been told a million times that Fuhrman wasn't "taken off the case". It has also been explained many,many times as to why MF scaled the fence. I guess nothing sinks in with you.

Just got here, I heard that fuhrman knew where the house was. As for the jumping of the fence..... younger, more athletic? Am I right. This is what I remember.
I must say if somebody in my family is found slaughtered and they find blood drops around my house, by all means, I want the police to enter and make sure I'm ok. Who would have a problem with this?

[Heyes]

Originally posted by socaldiva


Welcome & you remember correctly! :seeya:

Thanks! I feel better now! lol

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by socaldiva

You're still posting this even though you've been told a million times that Fuhrman wasn't "taken off the case". It has also been explained many,many times as to why MF scaled the fence. I guess nothing sinks in with you.

That's right Diva because there is nothing there for the information to "sink" into! IMO!

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by Heyes


Just got here, I heard that fuhrman knew where the house was. As for the jumping of the fence..... younger, more athletic? Am I right. This is what I remember.
I must say if somebody in my family is found slaughtered and they find blood drops around my house, by all means, I want the police to enter and make sure I'm ok. Who would have a problem with this?

Welcome! IMO, I think we ALL know "Who would have a problem with this?" and why, don't you?

[martin II]

Originally posted by Heyes


Just got here, I heard that fuhrman knew where the house was. As for the jumping of the fence..... younger, more athletic? Am I right. This is what I remember.
I must say if somebody in my family is found slaughtered and they find blood drops around my house, by all means, I want the police to enter and make sure I'm ok. Who would have a problem with this?

le are required to secure a legal search warrant BEFORE they enter your house not AFTER. regarless of the lie they tell.
as a citizen you do have rights.imo
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


le are required to secure a legal search warrant BEFORE they enter your house not AFTER. regarless of the lie they tell.
as a citizen you do have rights.imo
martin II


martin II, the police were let into Simpson's house by Arnelle Simpson. They did obtain a search warrant before the house was searched.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, the police were let into Simpson's house by Arnelle Simpson. They did obtain a search warrant before the house was searched.

bobaugust

They had no right to be on his property withour a legal search warrant. They bum rushed Arnelle at i think 6 am out of her bed.
She didn't know to demand a search warrant from these masters of trickery. imo
MARTIN ii

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, the police were let into Simpson's house by Arnelle Simpson. They did obtain a search warrant before the house was searched.

bobaugust

was arnelle a resident of oj's HOUSE or did she live in a guest house on the property? seems that the owner of the house has a give permission for le to enter without a search warrant.imo
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


They had no right to be on his property withour a legal search warrant. They bum rushed Arnelle at i think 6 am out of her bed.
She didn't know to demand a search warrant from these masters of trickery. imo
MARTIN ii


martin II, the police had probable cause to enter Simpson's estate. There was no reason for Arnelle not to let them into her father's house.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, the police had probable cause to enter Simpson's estate. There was no reason for Arnelle not to let them into her father's house.

bobaugust

bob'
They had no probable cause to enter oj's property. the lie that they told about notifying him was just a lie. If they rang the bell and no one answered , they should have left unless they had already decided that he was a suspect. imo
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


bob'
They had no probable cause to enter oj's property. the lie that they told about notifying him was just a lie. If they rang the bell and no one answered , they should have left unless they had already decided that he was a suspect. imo
martin II


martin II, there were lights in in the house. When no one answered the bell they became concerned. While waiting they saw the Westec sign outside the gate. Vannatter asked Phillips to call Westec to get Simpson's telephone number.

By coincidence a Westec car on routine patrol saw the police and stopped. The Westec patrol officer called his supervisor and then gave the police Simpson's telephone number as well as telling them as far as he knows Simpson should have been in the house as well as a live in housekeeper.

bobaugust

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by martin II

bob'
They had no probable cause to enter oj's property. the lie that they told about notifying him was just a lie. If they rang the bell and no one answered , they should have left unless they had already decided that he was a suspect. imo
martin II

Get Off of It! Just speculation on your part with nothing to back it up, as usual! Blah Blah Blah ~ Yada Yada Yada ~ Arguing Arguing Arguing! How much more bandwidth are you going to waste with this insanity?

JMO and MOO!!

[limakey]

Heyes,

IMO, the detectives had three solid reaons to justify their search, which is why I have a problem with their lies about it. Their actions did not match their testimony.

Plus, there are a few details that we don't know that is very important---that is who was listed as residents of the estate?

Using the term, "live in maid", does not mean she lived inside in the main house, only that she lived on the estate. It would be very intersting to find out who else was listed as residents of the estate.

[limakey]

Martin,

Maybe you can help me on this, did anyone ask why the Westec trust just happended to be outside the estate? It has always struck me odd that they just happend to be there---I have often edwondered was this a routine patrol--and if it wasn't then what brought them to the estate?

My first thought was that perhaps that they have received calls from their clients who expressed that something was going on and they wanted their block patrolled.

If this was not a routine patrol--then who called them and directed them to the Simpson estate?

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by limakey


Plus, there are a few details that we don't know that is very important---that is who was listed as residents of the estate?

Using the term, "live in maid", does not mean she lived inside in the main house, only that she lived on the estate. It would be very intersting to find out who else was listed as residents of the estate.


imakey, the Westec patrol officer told the detectives that as far as he knew Simpson should have been in the house as well as a live in housekeeper.

The detectives didn't know there were bungalows behind the house.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by limakey
[B]Martin,

Maybe you can help me on this, did anyone ask why the Westec trust just happended to be outside the estate? It has always struck me odd that they just happend to be there---I have often edwondered was this a routine patrol--and if it wasn't then what brought them to the estate? /B]


limakey, the detectives were ringing the bell and not receiving any response. There were lights on in the house yet no one was answering. They saw a Westec sign near the gate and Vannatter asked Phillips to call Westec and get Simpson's telephone number.

While they were waiting, by coincidence a Westec car on routine patrol saw the police and stopped. The Westec
patrol officer called his supervisor and then gave the police Simpson's telephone number as well as telling them as far as he knew Simpson should have been in the house as well as a live in housekeeper.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by limakey
Martin,

Maybe you can help me on this, did anyone ask why the Westec trust just happended to be outside the estate? It has always struck me odd that they just happend to be there---I have often edwondered was this a routine patrol--and if it wasn't then what brought them to the estate?

My first thought was that perhaps that they have received calls from their clients who expressed that something was going on and they wanted their block patrolled.

If this was not a routine patrol--then who called them and directed them to the Simpson estate?
limakey
it was reported that there was a Westec sticker on the gate or bell and that the cops called that number. their reasons could have been to see if Westec had a key to the house. the cops were acting like it would be strange for oj or anyone else NOT to be at home.

i am wondering if when they had made other notificaitons and found no response to bell ringing did they just go onto the property and enter a house without a legal search warrant
or would they note tried to make notification and no one home?
imo
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II

limakey
it was reported that there was a Westec sticker on the gate or bell and that the cops called that number. their reasons could have been to see if Westec had a key to the house. the cops were acting like it would be strange for oj or anyone else NOT to be at home.

i am wondering if when they had made other notificaitons and found no response to bell ringing did they just go onto the property and enter a house without a legal search warrant
or would they note tried to make notification and no one home?
imo
martin II


martin II, you take the facts and add your own version. Funny. The reason the police called Westec was to get Simpson's telephone number, not a key to the house. If you're going to attempt to answer questions try to to get your answers correct. But maybe that's asking too much of you.

As to what the police may have done in another situation it would probably depend on the circumstances. If they had just come from the home of a double homicide of the exwife of the person they were to notify that was less than five minutes away, and there were lights on in the house yet no one was answering, they probably would have done the same thing.

bobaugust

[Heyes]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8


Welcome! IMO, I think we ALL know "Who would have a problem with this?" and why, don't you?

Well..... I can think of ONE person. :D

And thanks guys for the welcome.:cool:

[Heyes]

Originally posted by martin II


le are required to secure a legal search warrant BEFORE they enter your house not AFTER. regarless of the lie they tell.
as a citizen you do have rights.imo
martin II

HI Martin, nice to meet ya. I pay my police to protect my family. With that being said, if I was in the same situation as Mr. Simpson. Ex-wife found slaughtered, blood in the front of my house. I'm not answering the door. No movement in the house.
I would hope to heaven that they wouldn't just say, oh well, We don't have a search warrant let's go boys. I would be pi$$ed! Please! Please, come in my house, make sure I'm not a victim too! The suspicious circumstances just scream.. Make sure Mr. Simpson is OK! Can you imagine if they had just drove off and it turned out OJ was laying dead in his house and his daughter was being held and threatened to be killed?

[martin II]

Originally posted by Heyes


HI Martin, nice to meet ya. I pay my police to protect my family. With that being said, if I was in the same situation as Mr. Simpson. Ex-wife found slaughtered, blood in the front of my house. I'm not answering the door. No movement in the house.
I would hope to heaven that they wouldn't just say, oh well, We don't have a search warrant let's go boys. I would be pi$$ed! Please! Please, come in my house, make sure I'm not a victim too! The suspicious circumstances just scream.. Make sure Mr. Simpson is OK! Can you imagine if they had just drove off and it turned out OJ was laying dead in his house and his daughter was being held and threatened to be killed?

heyes
hi
you make some good points if all of this had happened to oj (it didn't)and if the constitution did not prohibit illegal search and seisures(sp) to keep cops from entering your property without a search warrant.

lets say your ex was murdered down the street from you, does this give cops the right to enter your property and search through your house to see who is there at the same time looking for evidence to use against you when you had nothing to do with the murders? i don't think so. imo
martin II

[limakey]

Heyes,

Believe it or not, you are making the NG's point. Had the police's actions matched their testimony, there would be no issues. I'm sorry but if you believe that there are victims inside the house, you ring the door bell, how many times, call the home how many times, then walk back to the guest houses, take time to question both the male and the female all the while you think someone might be seriously wounded on the inside?

Then when you get into the home, a huge home with at least two stories and you only look for one victim and only in her room? Is there a law that says she had to be killed or hurt in her room?

I have no problem with the true reaon they went over there, the ex is always the first suspect, when you add the fact that at least two of the detectives knew about the 1989 incident and one knew about the 1985 incident as well, because he reported to it, to say they never suspected him just doesn't make any sense.

To say they went there for the sole purpose to notify Mr. Simpson of his wife's death to spare him the agony of learning about it from the media, makes no sense----because they called him on the telephone to tell him.

To say that they were also there, that if Mr. Simpson became so upset, they would be there for him to help him get it together by reminding him that he had two minor children at the police station who needed their dad, not only being with them physically, but to be there for them emotionally does match the fact that they did not send someone from the Chicago police force to notify him--was it because that he would take the news less emotionally in Chicago?

I have no problem with them suspecting OJ Simpson right off the bat, the problem I have is that they lied about it and there has to be several reasons behind.

They had at least 3 valid reasons to go to Rockingham, they had no valid reason for choosing the weakest. Another point, its not like cops have that problem when it comes to stuff like this, they know that any judge who tosses out searches, etc., pays dearly for their actions. In other words, they had no fear of their warrant being tossed. However, I do believe Vanatter took one for the home team on this issue.

IMO.

[2L8 4A D8]

Oh man! Good Gawd! Where's Bobaugust when you need him?

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust



The Westec patrol officer called his supervisor and then gave the police Simpson's telephone number as well as telling them as far as he knows Simpson should have been in the house as well as a live in housekeeper.

bobaugust


How would the Westec Patrol Officer have known the comings and going of OJ Simpson?

Anybody with half a brain can see these cops, did not gain access to Rockingham for OJs' safety and well being...

1. No standby request for paramedics-
2. They allowed Arnelle to enter the house first, for the possible discovery..

For those of you who continue to lie to yourselves.. Had this not been the case of OJ (black defendant), Nicole and Ron (white victims) and that majority Black Jury.. All of you would be screaming to the hills, about the obvious lies perpetrated against this defendant by LE...

But as it seems, "Race" prevails as always with some of you people! (SAD, so very disturbingly, SAD)...


IMO.. MOO.. JMHO...

[Heyes]

Originally posted by martin II


heyes
hi
you make some good points if all of this had happened to oj (it didn't)and if the constitution did not prohibit illegal search and seisures(sp) to keep cops from entering your property without a search warrant.

lets say your ex was murdered down the street from you, does this give cops the right to enter your property and search through your house to see who is there at the same time looking for evidence to use against you when you had nothing to do with the murders? i don't think so. imo
martin II

If there's blood from my car to my house, And I don't answer the phone or door then, He!! Yes!
Other than that, probably not.

[Heyes]

Originally posted by nettathirty



How would the Westec Patrol Officer have known the comings and going of OJ Simpson?

Anybody with half a brain can see these cops, did not gain access to Rockingham for OJs' safety and well being...

1. No standby request for paramedics-
2. They allowed Arnelle to enter the house first, for the possible discovery..

For those of you who continue to lie to yourselves.. Had this not been the case of OJ (black defendant), Nicole and Ron (white victims) and that majority Black Jury.. All of you would be screaming to the hills, about the obvious lies perpetrated against this defendant by LE...
n
But as it seems, "Race" prevails as always with some of you people! (SAD, so very disturbingly, SAD)...


IMO.. MOO.. JMHO...

Race? We loved OJ! Are ya kidding me? Anyone who has met him has walked away feeling good. People from all walks of life that have met him thought he was great! "We" didn't know him intimately, none of us (the general public) were close to him or nicole. He sunk his own battleship this time. I don't see anyone else to blame.

By the way this happened in L.A. On the heels of Rodney King. Now that everyone has cooled off. Oj is just laughed off as the guy who got away with murder. I have yet to talk to anyone who still says he's innocent. Minds have changed since then. Their point was made. O.J. got off on a "technicality" lol

[martin II]

Originally posted by Heyes


If there's blood from my car to my house, And I don't answer the phone or door then, He!! Yes!
Other than that, probably not.

heyes

furhman says he went to rockingham to make a notification. while waiting for someone to answer the bell he started looking for evidence all on his own. wonder why. they said oj was not a suspect at that time. furhman saw a very small 'BROWN' spot on the bronco parked on the public street and this caused him to illegally enter oj's property by jumping over the wall/fense at the gate. he had not seen any blood in the driveway before he jumped the wall because he was outside.imo


it is my opinion that all four detectives believed that oj was a suspect when they were at bundy and went to rockingham. they just told a lie on that issue imo
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by Heyes


Race? We loved OJ! Are ya kidding me? Anyone who has met him has walked away feeling good. People from all walks of life that have met him thought he was great! "We" didn't know him intimately, none of us (the general public) were close to him or nicole. He sunk his own battleship this time. I don't see anyone else to blame.

By the way this happened in L.A. On the heels of Rodney King. Now that everyone has cooled off. Oj is just laughed off as the guy who got away with murder. I have yet to talk to anyone who still says he's innocent. Minds have changed since then. Their point was made. O.J. got off on a "technicality" lol

heyes
what was THE "TECHNICALITY"
MARTIN ii

[Heyes]

Originally posted by martin II


heyes

furhman says he went to rockingham to make a notification. while waiting for someone to answer the bell he started looking for evidence all on his own. wonder why. they said oj was not a suspect at that time. furhman saw a very small 'BROWN' spot on the bronco parked on the public street and this caused him to illegally enter oj's property by jumping over the wall/fense at the gate. he had not seen any blood in the driveway before he jumped the wall because he was outside.imo


it is my opinion that all four detectives believed that oj was a suspect when they were at bundy and went to rockingham. they just told a lie on that issue imo
martin II

Victim or suspect They were prepared to investigate it either way, It looked to me like they went in with both scenerios in mind. what's wrong with that?

[martin II]

Originally posted by Heyes


Victim or suspect They were prepared to investigate it either way, It looked to me like they went in with both scenerios in mind. what's wrong with that?

heyes

vanhatter testified that OJ was not a suspect when they went to rockingham. i think m clarke was questioning him and he said oj was not a suspect any more than you were. so if you think they went in with both scenerios in mind. vanhatter lied on the stand. imo
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



How would the Westec Patrol Officer have known the comings and going of OJ Simpson?

Anybody with half a brain can see these cops, did not gain access to Rockingham for OJs' safety and well being...

1. No standby request for paramedics-
2. They allowed Arnelle to enter the house first, for the possible discovery..

For those of you who continue to lie to yourselves.. Had this not been the case of OJ (black defendant), Nicole and Ron (white victims) and that majority Black Jury.. All of you would be screaming to the hills, about the obvious lies perpetrated against this defendant by LE...

But as it seems, "Race" prevails as always with some of you people! (SAD, so very disturbingly, SAD)...


IMO.. MOO.. JMHO...



nettathirty, any reasonable thinking person with a brain understands how a simple notification that the detectives thought wouldn't take more than twenty minutes escalated based on the situation they encountered.

The Westec patrol officer who was responsible for patrolling Simpson's house only told the police detectives what he knew. According to his information Simpson and a live in housekeeper should have been in the house. Evidently Simpson never notified Westec of anything different.

1. There was no reason for the detectives to request paramedics unless a victim was found.
2. The detectives allowed Arnelle to open the door and enter the house so that she could show them where the housekeepers room was. After entering Simpson's house it was obvious there weren't signs of a struggle anywhere in the house.

The police didn't lie about this, only gullible people with active imaginations who either hate or mistrust LE create fantasies from simple explanations and reasonable reactions.

Your inability to understand the reality of what happened based on your obsession with race is what is so sad.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


heyes

vanhatter testified that OJ was not a suspect when they went to rockingham. i think m clarke was questioning him and he said oj was not a suspect any more than you were. so if you think they went in with both scenerios in mind. vanhatter lied on the stand. imo
martin II


martin II, you really don't care if what you say is factually correct or not, do you? All you do is argue just to argue.

Vannatter didn't lie. When he responded to Shapiro, not Clark, he was being somewhat facetious. But he was telling the truth. Simpson wasn't a suspect at that time, just a possible suspect the same as anyone else who knew Nicole was a possible suspect until they were eliminated.

The facts are the facts whether you believe them or not they do not change. The detectives were following orders to notify Simpson in person and help him recover his children. Just additional special treatment for a well known African American celebrity. That was the mistake that came back to bite the LAPD, opening the door for all the unsupported, unrealistic speculation that the defense fantasized and gullible people like you who hate or mistrust LE bought into.

bobaugust

[limakey]

Mr. August,

You have posted a blantant lie regarding Vanatter's intentions when he went to Bundy. When he was nailed in the courtroom and in the media on this regard, it was only then that he came up with his "potential" suspect CYA story.

Had he just left at that, then a weak back up CYA story is better then nothing. However, and this is what nails G's right between the eyes---he said he needed to talk to all the people that Nicole had seen and talked to within the last 72 hours of the life.

With this in mind, there were only two people who had this information at the time and that was Sydney and Justin. And as usual, his words don't match his actions.

If they were to talk to any and all people that Nicole spoke to within those 72 hours--the most important person was that person who made Nicole cry over the phone and the best friend she was fighting with. That all leads to Sydney Simpson and her brother. IMO.

And Mr. August only a completely ignorant person would believe that the cops didn't suspect OJ Simpson---which is why Vanatter was impeached on this issue by three witnesses---which one was an FBI agent, I think.

Husbands killings their wives has been happening since the beginning of time, in fact, some societies believed a wife should be killed if she disobeyed her husband. Husbands were already being charged and convicted of raping their wives by the time the Simpson trial took place. And you keep forgetting, Phillips and Fuhrman told Vanatter and Lange they knew of at least two prior incidents of 911 being called and police being dispatched.

[martin II]

bob

It is my understanding that when a wife or ex wife is killed, the husband or ex husband becomes the PRIME suspect by le immediately unless the real killer is caught or confesses.


now we have Nicole dead at her condo and the detectives are informed by furhman, that she is the wife or ex of oj simpson that lives 5 minutes or so away and this is known because furhman
had previously responded to some abuse call at their/her home.

instead of sending two detectives to make the 'NOTIFICATION"
they send all four.

now you want to play with words and say they thought oj was a possible suspect and not the PRIME suspect is what i call fudging
with words. imo

vanhatter said "oj was no more a suspect that you"(shaperio) so did he mean POSSIBLE suspect , PRIME suspect or not a suspect at all?

if le needed to talk to all the people that had spoken to Nicole in the last 72 hours, did they grab faye, the father that picked up his child from nicoles or any one else?
martin II

[Beebee]

Originally posted by Heyes


O.J. got off on a "technicality" lol

What was the technicality?

[martin II]

Originally posted by Beebee


What was the technicality?

HI Beebee

i would like to know the answer to that also.
martin II

[Beebee]

Originally posted by martin II


HI Beebee

i would like to know the answer to that also.
martin II

Hi martin :)

I don't think a NOT GUILTY verdict by a JURY is considered a "technicality"....

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II
bob

It is my understanding that when a wife or ex wife is killed, the husband or ex husband becomes the PRIME suspect by le immediately unless the real killer is caught or confesses.


now we have Nicole dead at her condo and the detectives are informed by furhman, that she is the wife or ex of oj simpson that lives 5 minutes or so away and this is known because furhman
had previously responded to some abuse call at their/her home.

instead of sending two detectives to make the 'NOTIFICATION"
they send all four.

now you want to play with words and say they thought oj was a possible suspect and not the PRIME suspect is what i call fudging
with words. imo

vanhatter said "oj was no more a suspect that you"(shaperio) so did he mean POSSIBLE suspect , PRIME suspect or not a suspect at all?

if le needed to talk to all the people that had spoken to Nicole in the last 72 hours, did they grab faye, the father that picked up his child from nicoles or any one else?
martin II



martin II, in this case the only reason the detectives went to Simpson's house was they were ordered to go. An order that was given by Commander Bushey when he first found out who the victim was. An order that was based on Bushey's concerns that this would be high profile case and likely to attract media attention.

Did the detectives suspect that Simpson may have been involved in these murders? Maybe in the back of their minds since that's the nature of what detectives do. They have to be suspicious of everyone including spouses and ex spouses. The point is that nothing the detectives did when they arrived at Rockingham was a result of any suspicion about Simpson. The detectives were reacting to the situation that developed.

They detectives went to Rockingham with the intention of notifying Simpson of the death of his exwife in person. Lange asked the two West LA detectives to accompany them because they knew where the house was and could stay after the notification to help Simpson recover his children who had been taken to their police station.

If Simpson had been home that's exactly what would have happened. The Robbery Homicide detectives would have returned to the murder scene and Phillips and Fuhrman would have helped Simpson recover his children.

In the investigation of these murders, everyone involved with the two victims were spoken to. In the criminal trial Vannatter was simply reacting to all of the false insinuations and accusations defense attorneys were making with his facetious comment to Shapiro.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by limakey
Mr. August,

You have posted a blantant lie regarding Vanatter's intentions when he went to Bundy. When he was nailed in the courtroom and in the media on this regard, it was only then that he came up with his "potential" suspect CYA story.





limakey, what someone says they were thinking is not a lie. Detectives have to be suspicious of everyone connected to a homicide until they are eliminated., that's the nature of their job. As to how seriously each detective considers someone a suspect at any particular time is is a personal belief.

When the detectives first arrived at Bundy, there was no evidence that they knew of that pointed to Simpson. The detectives went to Simpson's house following orders and everything that happened was a result of the situation they found there.

Simpson's defense attorneys made many false insinuations and accusations because they had no credible explanations for all the evidence that pointed only to Simpson. Insinuations and accusations are not evidence only excuses because the police found the killer so quickly.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

My god, someone told me you folks were over here. As an investigator in the Simpson matter and one of the producers of the documentary "Serpents Rising: An Independent Investigation of the OJ Simpson Murder Trial" many comments I've read here are extraordinary, in light of what we've actually uncovered, to say the least. I'll give you one for instance: Many of you have discussed the infamous Bruno Magli shoes that supposedly made the bloody prints at the murder site. Anyone, make your case about placing OJ in them at the murder site...........

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben
My god, someone told me you folks were over here. As an investigator in the Simpson matter and one of the producers of the documentary "Serpents Rising: An Independent Investigation of the OJ Simpson Murder Trial" many comments I've read here are extraordinary, in light of what we've actually uncovered, to say the least. I'll give you one for instance: Many of you have discussed the infamous Bruno Magli shoes that supposedly made the bloody prints at the murder site. Anyone, make your case about placing OJ in them at the murder site...........


Sure, over 30 authenticated photographs taken by two different photographers at a Buffalo Bills football game 9 months before the murders. All show Simpson wearing the exact kind of shoes that the killer wore at Bundy.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

Bobby my man, you're still singing that same old tired music. It's easy to argue with you that testimony was presented that the photographs were phoney. However, that only stokes a subjective debate that you seem to relish. In spite of your alleged number of photos of OJ in Buffalo in Bruno Maglis, how does that put him in Bruno Maglis at the murder site???

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by Big Ben

*Snipped*

In spite of your alleged number of photos of OJ in Buffalo in Bruno Maglis, how does that put him in Bruno Maglis at the murder site???


Big Ben: I'm pro-OJ- OJ (IMO) is not the killer, and the items found at Bundy, exonerates Mr OJ Simpson!

The 10 reasons many of these self confessed "GENIUS" believe OJ wore the shoes..

10. Bruno Maglis are expensive and rare, and OJ is rich!
9. Bruno Maglis are expensive and rare, and OJ is rich!
8. Bruno Maglis are expensive and rare, and OJ is rich!
7. Bruno Maglis are expensive and rare, and OJ is rich!
6. Bruno Maglis are expensive and rare, and OJ is rich!
5. Bruno Maglis are expensive and rare, and OJ is rich!
4. Bruno Maglis are expensive and rare, and OJ is rich!
3. Bruno Maglis are expensive and rare, and OJ is rich!
2. Heidstra heard what sounded like Bruno Maglis after the "gate slammed"..
1. Bob August said so!

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by socaldiva


Is more like it. :rolleyes:

:lol: I rest my case!

[Big Ben]

In spite of your alleged number of photos of OJ in Buffalo in Bruno Maglis, how does that put him in Bruno Maglis at the murder site??? [/B]

That's not what I had hoped for. You guys are no fun! Why don't you go to YouTube.com and check out the free clips after entering 'Serpents Rising' or www.ojcoverup.com. YouTube is better because evrything is available for free. Maybe some of the two minute clips will inspire some objective questioning.

[sweet pea 15]

I am a very good friend of Mario G. Nitrini 111. You may be aware of the fact that he has been investigating this case for many years and he has come to the conclusion that OJ Simpson is guilty of the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. And that he had help in committing these murders. The one person that NO ONE can explain away when it comes to OJ's innocence is Rocky Bateman, OJ's regular limo driver. I am wondering if during YOUR investigation, you happened to come across any information about Rocky?

Thanks in advance.

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by sweet pea 15
I am a very good friend of Mario G. Nitrini 111. I am wondering if during YOUR investigation, you happened to come across any information about Rocky?

Thanks in advance.

I'm waiting to hear Mario's take on the subject matter, he was supposed to share his perspective via e-mail last week. No, I have nothing in my file relative to Rocky.

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by socaldiva
I don't need to go to utube to know that Simpson is a double murderer :shrug:

sniff, sniff....I smell a multiple nic. 3 posts....hmmmm.....

You're in the wrong profession, you need to wrap your head up, get you a crystal ball, and start charging.

[sweet pea 15]

Originally posted by Big Ben


I'm waiting to hear Mario's take on the subject matter, he was supposed to share his perspective via e-mail last week. No, I have nothing in my file relative to Rocky.

It is my understanding that he DID answer your e-mail. I'll let him know that you did not receive a reply.

Although I know that OJ Simpson destroyed evidence in this case and he lied and continues to lie about his knowledge of what happened that night, I do not agree with Mario that he murdered Nicole and Ron. I do think there was more than one killer. And I ABSOLUTELY think that certain members of the LAPD took liberties with pieces of evidence in this case.

Thanks for answering my question.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben
Bobby my man, you're still singing that same old tired music. It's easy to argue with you that testimony was presented that the photographs were phoney.


Big Ben, there was no testimony that the Flammer photographs were phony. The fact is that one of those thirty photographs was published in the Buffalo Bills Report seven months before the murders.

bobaugust

[Wukong]

Big Ben,

Your question is an exercise in futility. Of course it's impossible to say with 100% certainty that OJ was in those Bruno Maglis. There is evidence that OJ owned a pair of Bruno Maglis and the footprints at the scene were in his size. This is all circumstantial, but I would like to know the evidence that puts anyone else in those Bruno Maglis.

If you can't give a satisfactory answer, then next question please.

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by sweet pea 15


It is my understanding that he DID answer your e-mail. And I ABSOLUTELY think that certain members of the LAPD took liberties with pieces of evidence in this case.

Sweat Pea,
He sent me an e-mail, but it didn't say anything other than what you've said he believes. In regard to your other issue, it certainly affirms your suspicions to have officers from the scandalized Ramparts Precinct, who sent thousands of innocent men to prison with planted evidence, appear at Simpson's Rockingham residence the night the bloody glove was discovered. Denzil did a marvelous job portraying their conduct in "Training Days" don't you think? You would be served well if you purchased the documentary at www.serpentsrising.com or www.ojcoverup.com. At least you'll be looking at uncovered objective evidence and not subjective hearsay.

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by Wukong
Big Ben,

This is all circumstantial, but I would like to know the evidence that puts anyone else in those Bruno Maglis.


Not so fast, Wukong. What is the evidence that you are aware of that "puts anyone in those Bruno Maglis"?

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



Big Ben, there was no testimony that the Flammer photographs were phony. The fact is that one of those thirty photographs was published in the Buffalo Bills Report seven months before the murders.

bobaugust

bob
there you go again.

you need to put oj in the shoes at bundy at about 10:00 to 10:45
not in buffalo n.y. no murder happened in buffalo.imo
martin II

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by bobaugust



Big Ben, there was no testimony that the Flammer photographs were phony........

And I take it, Bob, that you are of the opinion that digital photography has not escalated to a level of sophistication to manipulate the photographs.

[martin II]

Originally posted by Wukong
Big Ben,

Your question is an exercise in futility. Of course it's impossible to say with 100% certainty that OJ was in those Bruno Maglis. There is evidence that OJ owned a pair of Bruno Maglis and the footprints at the scene were in his size. This is all circumstantial, but I would like to know the evidence that puts anyone else in those Bruno Maglis.

If you can't give a satisfactory answer, then next question please.

wukong

because no one else was caught in or with the shoes by le does that mean that it had to be oj? NO.
We all know that oj was not caught in or with the shoes.
IMO
MARTIN ii

[martin II]

Originally posted by Big Ben


You're in the wrong profession, you need to wrap your head up, get you a crystal ball, and start charging.


:beer:
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben


That's not what I had hoped for. You guys are no fun! Why don't you go to YouTube.com and check out the free clips after entering 'Serpents Rising' or www.ojcoverup.com. YouTube is better because evrything is available for free. Maybe some of the two minute clips will inspire some objective questioning.



Big Ben, that's funny. Maybe you can rip off $4.00 from uninformed people with that bull crap, but I doubt if you will find any gullible suckers here. At least not among the reasonable thinking posters who know the facts and evidence in this case that prove Simpson and only Simpson killed both Ron and Nicole.

Nice try.

bobaugust

[Wukong]

Originally posted by Big Ben


Not so fast, Wukong. What is the evidence that you are aware of that "puts anyone in those Bruno Maglis"?

There is none, thus my request for the next question. I would ask how many killers for hire have Bruno Maglis as part of their attire? I am sure you have plenty of clever responses that hints someone else was wearing the Bruno Maglis, but I also know there is even less proof for this as there is for OJ wearing them and leaving the footprints at the crime scene.

I am way too tired for semantics and three card monty when it comes to evidence in this case. I have heard all the stories and still keep coming back to OJ. If you have something that proves someone else was wearing Bruno Maglis that night then I would love to hear it; but I know you don't so I will wait for the next question.

As for Mario, he did send you an email but you never replied. If you need more information than what he sent, I suggest you ask him for it. To come on here and say that he didn't say anything is not very becoming given the fact you never even replied to his first email.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben


And I take it, Bob, that you are of the opinion that digital photography has not escalated to a level of sophistication to manipulate the photographs.


Big Ben, the technology may have been available somewhere in the mid 90's but that's certainly not proof nor evidence that anyone ever used it on any of the photographs taken by the three different photographers in 1993.

All of the photographs were taken in September 1993. The negatives and the prints of the Scull and Flammer photographs were inspected by a former FBI photo analyst and found to be authentic.

All of the Flammer photographs were full body shots showing Simpson posing with members of the Monday Morning Quarterback Club who had hired Flammer to take those photographs honoring Simpson that day celebrating the anniversary of his record 2003 yard running record.

Flammer named all of the people who were in those photographs including Bill Munson and Dennis Lynch form the Buffalo Bills. Six of those photographs were sold to the Buffalo Bills. No one ever testified any of those photographs were fake.

And the clincher was that one of the photographs was published in the Buffalo Bills Report, a monthly publication, in December 1993 seven months before the murders. A copy of that publication was entered into evidence. That fact proves the photographs were not fake or manipulated.

The thirty Flammer photographs confirmed the Scull photographs were authentic and not fake. There were other photographs as well. The McCrone photographs taken that same day also show Simpson wearing the same clothing and shoes as in the Scull and Flammer photographs. An unedited side line news video was shown from that football game again showing Simpson wearing the same clothing as he was shown wearing in all of the photographs.

bobaugust

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by Big Ben
My god, someone told me you folks were over here. As an investigator in the Simpson matter and one of the producers of the documentary "Serpents Rising: An Independent Investigation of the OJ Simpson Murder Trial" many comments I've read here are extraordinary, in light of what we've actually uncovered, to say the least. I'll give you one for instance: Many of you have discussed the infamous Bruno Magli shoes that supposedly made the bloody prints at the murder site. Anyone, make your case about placing OJ in them at the murder site...........

As I ask every newbie, reincarnated nic and multiple nic ~ Did you get the Moderator's permission to open this assinine Thread?

JMO and MOO!!

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



Big Ben, the technology may have been available somewhere in the mid 90's but that's certainly not proof nor evidence that anyone ever used it on any of the photographs taken by the three different photographers in 1993.

All of the photographs were taken in September 1993. The negatives and the prints of the Scull and Flammer photographs were inspected by a former FBI photo analyst and found to be authentic.

All of the Flammer photographs were full body shots showing Simpson posing with members of the Monday Morning Quarterback Club who had hired Flammer to take those photographs honoring Simpson that day celebrating the anniversary of his record 2003 yard running record.

Flammer named all of the people who were in those photographs including Bill Munson and Dennis Lynch form the Buffalo Bills. Six of those photographs were sold to the Buffalo Bills. No one ever testified any of those photographs were fake.

And the clincher was that one of the photographs was published in the Buffalo Bills Report, a monthly publication, in December 1993 seven months before the murders. A copy of that publication was entered into evidence. That fact proves the photographs were not fake or manipulated.

The thirty Flammer photographs confirmed the Scull photographs were authentic and not fake. There were other photographs as well. The McCrone photographs taken that same day also show Simpson wearing the same clothing and shoes as in the Scull and Flammer photographs. An unedited side line news video was shown from that football game again showing Simpson wearing the same clothing as he was shown wearing in all of the photographs.

bobaugust

bo
so now all you need is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that oj was in those shoes at Bundy on 6/12.
not he must have, not who else could have, not maby he had them on, not all the evidence presented says it could have been oj in those shoes. or no other evidence proves it was anyone else. imo

you need to have caught oj in the shoes or in his possession imo
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust




Big Ben, that's funny. Maybe you can rip off $4.00 from uninformed people with that bull crap, but I doubt if you will find any gullible suckers here. At least not among the reasonable thinking posters who know the facts and evidence in this case that prove Simpson and only Simpson killed both Ron and Nicole.

Nice try.

bobaugust


right bob

lets just confine the info received to the reams of stuff you post from your hard drive. no reason to have other opinions or info.

ps
i do remember you posting the how to purchase pictures from some furhman book selling activities previously.
imo
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


bo
so now all you need is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that oj was in those shoes at Bundy on 6/12.
not he must have, not who else could have, not maby he had them on, not all the evidence presented says it could have been oj in those shoes. or no other evidence proves it was anyone else. imo

you need to have caught oj in the shoes or in his possession imo
martin II


martin II, no it's not necessary to have caught Simpson in those shoes or have them in his possession to know that he wore them at Bundy. The proof is all the circumstantial and physical evidence that proves Simpson was at Bundy and the authenticated photographs showing Simpson wearing the exact same shoes that left the bloody shoeprints at Bundy. The fact that Simpson lied about owning those shoes only confirms what the evidence proves.

The bloody shoe prints were made by the same size shoes Simpson wore.
The bloody shoe prints were made by expensive shoes that photographs show Simpson wearing.
Simpson's blood found near the bloody shoe prints.
Simpson's blood found on the rear gate at Bundy.
Simpson's hair found at Bundy, one on Ron's shirt.
Fiber evidence from Simpson's clothing found on Ron's shirt.
Simpson's glove found at Bundy.
Simpson's hat found at Bundy.
Heidstra heard what was most likely Simpson's voice coming from Nicole's condo.
Heidstra saw what was most likely Simpson's Bronco speed away from Nicole's condo.
Shively saw Simpson's Bronco.
Shively saw Simpson.

Simpson's Bronco was not at his house when the murders were committed.
Simpson's blood and both victims blood found in his Bronco.

The cut on Simpson's left hand
The glove found at Rockingham
Simpson's blood found on that glove along with both victims blood.
The fiber evidence from Simpson's Bronco and Simpson's clothing found on that glove.
Simpson's blood found outside and inside his house.

Simpson's Bronco was at Rockingham when the murders were committed.
Simpson had no legitimate alibi for when the murders were committed.
The dark colored sweat suit found in Simpson's washing machine.
Nicole and Simpson's blood found on Simpson's sock.
The fiber evidence found on Simpson's socks from the clothing he wore.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II



right bob

lets just confine the info received to the reams of stuff you post from your hard drive. no reason to have other opinions or info.

ps
i do remember you posting the how to purchase pictures from some furhman book selling activities previously.
imo
martin II


martin II, bull crap. I never said or did any such thing.

What's even more telling is how you could even come up with such a lie. Relying on your memory has caused you to make many false statements about this case, now it has caused you to outright lie.

Besides the fact you can't seem to read. I said I doubt that reasonable thinking people who know the facts and evidence that Simpson and only Simpson was the killer would not be interested.

That doesn't include you. You are not a reasonable thinking person. You don't know the facts and evidence in this case and you don't believe Simpson was the killer. Go spend the four dollars and I will be happy to explain to you why what you learn from that web site is all bull crap or has nothing to do with the Bundy murders.

bobaugust

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by Big Ben


Sweat Pea,
He sent me an e-mail, but it didn't say anything other than what you've said he believes. In regard to your other issue, it certainly affirms your suspicions to have officers from the scandalized Ramparts Precinct, who sent thousands of innocent men to prison with planted evidence, appear at Simpson's Rockingham residence the night the bloody glove was discovered. Denzil did a marvelous job portraying their conduct in "Training Days" don't you think? You would be served well if you purchased the documentary at www.serpentsrising.com or www.ojcoverup.com. At least you'll be looking at uncovered objective evidence and not subjective hearsay. It is against the TOS to advertise any for profit site

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
It is against the TOS to advertise any for profit site

fbg
you do seem to try to act as the moderator. especially when you dissagree with the poster. you are really a control freak imo

martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by bobaugust





Simpson's Bronco was at Rockingham when the murders were committed.


Correction: Simpson's Bronco WASN"T at Rockingham when the murders were committed.

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
you do seem to try to act as the moderator. especially when you dissagree with the poster. you are really a control freak imo

martin II Nah -- just want everyone to play by the rules and I'd hate to see anyone banned because of their ignorance of the rules.

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by socaldiva


No surprise that you are too dense to understand my post. :tongue:


I would actually have to be "dense" to understand any of your post..

Self proclaim superiority, does not make you superior! It makes you an ass.. congratulations!!!

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust


Correction: Simpson's Bronco WASN"T at Rockingham when the murders were committed.


OJ's Bronco wasn't at Rockingham, when he and Kato went and return from McDonalds..

[Wukong]

What's up Doc?

I am waiting for you to start discussing your evidence instead of pimping your video.

"Wow! Where does one start with all the O.J. distortions?"

Maybe we can start with some of your distortions.

[Wukong]

Originally posted by nettathirty



OJ's Bronco wasn't at Rockingham, when he and Kato went and return from McDonalds..

Really? Where was it then? According to OJ it was there.

[Verin B.]

I've been lurking in these forums for a long while now, and this is my first (and more than likely last) post. I admire you G's a great deal for fighting the good fight (I count myself among you, in case you're wondering), but honestly, bob august could produce video of OJ murdering Ron and Nicole and the NG's would claim LE hooked up with Steven Spielberg to fabricate it. The principle of Occam's Razor, not to mention common sense, is lost on these people.

The most prevalent question on my mind as I read these ridiculous theories is "why"? Why go to such extreme and elaborate measures to frame a beloved sports hero? It reminds me of the old Dana Carvey bit about being approached by a shadowy figure on South Bundy that asks, "We're framin' OJ, you in?"

How much does it suck the murders occured on my birthday?

Anyhow, keep up the good work, and don't let 'em get to you too much.

-V.

[2L8 4A D8]

Verin: Welcome to H3LL! Hope that you will stay with us, but won't blame you if you don't. Sometimes I think that the rest of us G's are S&M Freaks with what we put up with! LOL!

Here's a Post that says it all re: the NG's:
Orginally posted by rashomon

Fascinating how all these perps seem to have their personal fan club. No matter how overwhelming the evidence is which points to their idol, they will repeat mantra-like, the same messages over and over again. Maybe this is a form of magic thinking, and they believe if they repeat it often enough, it will work and convince people.

<Snipped> pointed out the MO of those people (you come across them in every true crime forum where circumstantial evidence cases are being discussed):

- they fanatically stick to message
- they deliberately ignore the evidence ('ignorance is bliss')
- and when at a loss for arguments, they start personal attacks.

Old Post 10-06-2006 12:46 AM
This is what we put up with on a daily basis. God help us!

JMO and MOO!!

[Verin B.]

Maybe this is a form of magic thinking, and they believe if they repeat it often enough, it will work and convince people.


2L8 (and rashomon), true enough. If you tell yourself the same outrageous story enough times, you'll start to believe it, especially if you want to.

Heh, I can already anticipate the infantile retorts to the above comment.

"I guesse u wood no!!"

Cleverness (and the ability to spell) isn't really the dominion of your average NG. Case in point:

And what do you suppose I smell?

How about your own BS?

Cheers!

-V.

[Wukong]

Originally posted by Holly
I don't have any "evidence" but I do have what I consider a plausible theory about who might have worn them to the murder site.

Since I am unwilling to fight, I will only tell YOU in a PM because I trust your discretion and good sense.

Holly,

I tried to reply to your PM but your box was full.

[Wukong]

Originally posted by Holly
Nobody knows for sure where the Bronco was at the time of the murders.

I kept waiting for someone to ask that question of the limo driver. I am still waiting.

According to Simpson's neighbor Mr. Cale, it wasn't at Rockingham when he walked his dog araound 9:30 - 9:45. And according to Jill Shively, OJ was driving it in the vicinity of Bundy around 10:50 PM that night. That's two people who knew it wasn't at Rockingham.

Mr. Cale's testimony:

Q. Okay. Did you have a clear view down south on Rockingham?

A. Yes.

Q. Are there street lights?

A. There's some, yes, sir. There's one street light right here at the corner.

Q. You can take a seat.

Q. When you took your walk between 9:30 and 9:45, was there a car parked on the east side of Rockingham, between Ashford and the Rockingham driveway, from Mr. Simpson's property?

A. No, sir, there was not.

Q. Was there a car parked anywhere between -- if I can have the pointer, please.

Q. Anywhere between Ashford, here on the north, and this driveway of Mr. Simpson's estate, here on the east side?

A. No, I don't believe there was a car anywhere on Rockingham, that I could see, down south.

Q. And you believe that was between 9:30 and 9:45 on June 12?

A. Yes, sir. I would say closer to 9:45.

http://simpson.walraven.org/dec03-96.html

[Verin B.]

Too bad this wasn't post!

Okay, I'm pretty sure you were trying to express some sort of idea or sentiment with that classic bit of repartee. Unfortunately, reading the minds of message board posters isn't one of my talents, so I really have no idea what you're trying to get across with such a brilliantly-penned sentence fragment. But hey, it was in English! That's gotta count for something.

If you meant to imply I'm a figment of an already-established forum member's imagination, well, that's pretty much what I'd expect from a paranoid NG. Maybe later we can team up and find the proof we need that 9/11 was an inside job! ;)

Cheers!

-V.

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by Verin B.

Okay, I'm pretty sure you were trying to express some sort of idea or sentiment with that classic bit of repartee. Unfortunately, reading the minds of message board posters isn't one of my talents, so I really have no idea what you're trying to get across with such a brilliantly-penned sentence fragment. But hey, it was in English! That's gotta count for something.

If you meant to imply I'm a figment of an already-established forum member's imagination, well, that's pretty much what I'd expect from a paranoid NG. Maybe later we can team up and find the proof we need that 9/11 was an inside job! ;)

Cheers!

-V.

:beer: :beer:

[martin II]

v

Thanks for your post.

The idea of ng's posting their positions over and over again until they belive them can be true for g's as well. imo. don't you think?

martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by Verin B.
I've been lurking in these forums for a long while now, and this is my first (and more than likely last) post. I admire you G's a great deal for fighting the good fight (I count myself among you, in case you're wondering), but honestly, bob august could produce video of OJ murdering Ron and Nicole and the NG's would claim LE hooked up with Steven Spielberg to fabricate it. The principle of Occam's Razor, not to mention common sense, is lost on these people.

The most prevalent question on my mind as I read these ridiculous theories is "why"? Why go to such extreme and elaborate measures to frame a beloved sports hero? It reminds me of the old Dana Carvey bit about being approached by a shadowy figure on South Bundy that asks, "We're framin' OJ, you in?"

How much does it suck the murders occured on my birthday?

Anyhow, keep up the good work, and don't let 'em get to you too much.

-V.

v

give me a video of oj killing nicole and ron and i am switching sides.

Otherwise, i am inclined to go with the criminal trial jury that heard all of the testimony and found that the prosecution did not meet their standard of reasonable doubt. Which we all know they were required to do.IMO
MARTIN ii

[tazzybaby]

Originally posted by martin II


v

give me a video of oj killing nicole and ron and i am switching sides.

Otherwise, i am inclined to go with the criminal trial jury that heard all of the testimony and found that the prosecution did not meet their standard of reasonable doubt. Which we all know they were required to do.IMO
MARTIN ii

But, some of the criminal jurors also said they might have voted differently had they heard what the civil jurors heard. So, how does that change your opinion? It should.

[martin II]

Originally posted by tazzybaby


But, some of the criminal jurors also said they might have voted differently had they heard what the civil jurors heard. So, how does that change your opinion? It should.

tazzy hi

Not at all.
These comments quoted by 'SOME' jorors is just after the fact comments IF TRUE. jorors say these things all the time when given certain type questions by the media trying to find some flaw in their past verdict.

They would have had to be on the civil trial jury and participated in diliberations to know how they would have voted. imo

MARTIN ii

[sweet pea 15]

Originally posted by Big Ben


Sweat Pea,
He sent me an e-mail, but it didn't say anything other than what you've said he believes.

If you did receive a reply from him, I don't understand why you didn't answer him? He was/is looking forward to conversing with you on this subject. The one thing with Mario is that he keeps an open mind about EVERYTHING. Mario believes these things because of the evidence he has uncovered during his investigation of the murders.

These things are irrefutable. Mario was asked by OJ's limo driver Rocky Bateman to follow Nicole because he heard her discussing a plot to somehow use OJ's blood to get money out of him. After the murders, Mario does indeed find out that OJ's blood is taken from a place called HEMACARE and also from a hospital lab. Now, if you're on trial for the murder of two people and your blood is found at the crime scene wouldn't you welcome Mario with open arms and have him as your star defense witness? NOT O.J. Simpson. Instead his defense team CHASES him away. Not once, not twice, but many times. And do you know why? Because Mario knows about ROCKY BATEMAN.

You can ask Mr. Simpson about the plot to steal his blood. He knows all about it. But he's not going to be truthful with you. Even if it means it can help to prove to everyone that he didn't murder Nicole and Ron.

Don't think I'm putting this all on OJ. The prosecution knew about this too. They were despicable the way they handled the blood plot, the way they handled Mario, the way they handled Bill Wasz, the way they handled Mark Fuhrman and let's not forget that Judge Ito shouldn't have even been involved because of his wife.

Mario believes you are an honorable man and I happen to agree with him. But with all due respect, if you want to do a thorough investigation of these murders then you MUST include Rocky Bateman, the missing bag, and the plot to steal OJ's blood among other things if you are going to do so.

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by martin II
These comments quoted by 'SOME' jorors is just after the fact comments IF TRUE. The book plays down the importance of the now-infamous glove demonstration, however, in which prosecutor Christopher Darden had Simpson try on the evidence gloves found at his estate and at the crime scene. The gloves appeared not to fit, but the jurors said they weren't convinced.

"Those gloves fit," Bess wrote. "He wasn't putting them on right."

"Sure," added Rubin-Jackson, "you know, they fit. ... I must have had an expression on my face because as he stood there, it was like he was talking to me, and he went, 'They don't fit.' They would have fit anybody."

[ojisinnocent]

Big Ben:

Be sure to read a private mesage I sent you.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snipped* The book plays down the importance of the now-infamous glove demonstration, however, in which prosecutor Christopher Darden had Simpson try on the evidence gloves found at his estate and at the crime scene. The gloves appeared not to fit, but the jurors said they weren't convinced.

"Those gloves fit," Bess wrote. "He wasn't putting them on right."

"Sure," added Rubin-Jackson, "you know, they fit. ... I must have had an expression on my face because as he stood there, it was like he was talking to me, and he went, 'They don't fit.' They would have fit anybody."

fbg
you need to give links to these 'QUOTES' you keep posting. otherwise your history of posting here does not allow me to believe any of it without a link imo

at any rate when they voted NOT GUILTY they must have thought the gloved DID NOT FIT.
IMO
MARTIN ii

[martin II]

Originally posted by sassylassy


if u dont like it here...then leave! no one is forcing you to stay here and oh yeah dont let the door hit you in the ***** on your way out

bye bye!:punch:

sassylassy

I volunteer to hold the door open.
martin II

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by martin II
at any rate when they voted NOT GUILTY they must have thought the gloved DID NOT FIT. who are you kidding? They didn't care whether or not the gloves fit --

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


sassylassy

I volunteer to hold the door open.
martin II Because, after all, we know that martin doesn't think anything of a woman being hit.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snipped* who are you kidding? They didn't care whether or not the gloves fit --

fbg

They were listening and waiting for the prosecution to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. IT DID NOT HAPPEN . so they told oj to go home imo
martinII

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Because, after all, we know that martin doesn't think anything of a woman being hit.

fbg

If you are being hit there is nothing i can do but feel sorry for you and advise you to run. imo
martin II

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by Wukong


There is none, thus my request for the next question. I would ask how many killers for hire have Bruno Maglis as part of their attire?

My "clever responses" are only intent upon keeping the questions and answers as close to the objective and less to the subjective as possible, Wukong.

However, here is my answer to the relevant question re.. the Bruno Magli Shoe Prints. Bruno Magli is no more than a brand name that contracted with SILGA GOMMA the rubber shoe sole manufacturer to provide to it rubber soles from SILGA's U2887 rubber mold. At the same time that SILGA provided shoe soles from the U2887 mold to Bruno Magli they were contracted to provid the same shoe soles from that same U2887 rubber mold to LORD and LORD provided their contingent of U2887 rubber soles to 19 shoe brands they owned on several continents of the world.

The alleged identity of the shoe was identified by the pattern left by the heel and forefoot and not by anyone seeing the brand name, due to the raised heel and forefoot of the U2887 shoe sole. The brand name is located between the heel and the raised forfoot and never touches the surface of the earth.

There is no question that the bloody prints at Bundy were made by the U2887 shoe sole, but the issue is how would one be able to determine that they were made by Bruno Magli and not one of the other 19 shoe brands owned by LORD Shoes from around the world.

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by Verin B.
Why go to such extreme and elaborate measures to frame a beloved sports hero? It reminds me of the old Dana Carvey bit about being approached by a shadowy figure on South Bundy that asks, "We're framin' OJ, you in?

-V.

You got to look beyond OJ, ...V! Many experiments and exercises were begun on a preliminary basis. Forget about personalizing it in regard to O.J. Just think about the valuable information that mad scientists have learned about certain reactions of the American public's psyche when and if confronted with a perceived extreme outrage. The OJ matter may have ultimately been a calculated primer for a subsequent major event.

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by sweet pea 15
But with all due respect, if you want to do a thorough investigation of these murders then you MUST include Rocky Bateman, the missing bag, and the plot to steal OJ's blood among other things if you are going to do so.

Your points are well taken sweet pea, and I am open to hearing Mario's position when he slows down to provide it and that's where it lies at this point. Furthermore, the OMIG investigative group did an excellent job uncovering powerful evidence that is little more basic and direct in pointing to malfeasance in the Simpson case. But I do believe with bird dogs willing to do their due diligence, like that which you are sharing, this magnificent fraud will ultimately unravel. I just hope that all the principals will stop dying so that we can put the question to them at the appointed time.

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by socaldiva


IIRC only 9% of the population wears size 12. Sounds like an awfully big co-winky dink to me.


"IIRC only 9% of population wears size 12......" Maybe because 91 % of the world, in Asia, Africa, and South America where most of the world lives, barely reach a size beyond that of pygmies, Socal.

What does that mean anyway? "Size 12"! Can you tell me quickly, exactly, how many inches is "Size 12", Socal?

The word "Size" does not denote anything specific, the word was used to play on ones proclivity to see guilt and they went no further in examining what they were specifically being told.

How many inches is the alleged metric size 46 SILGA Sole that the FBI agent said represented a U.S. "size 12", Socal? How many inches does Simpson's foot measure, Socal?

How long are the "Bruno Magli" shoe prints inside the square sidewalk tiles at Nicole's residence at 875 South Bundy, Socal? What are the dimensions of those side walk tiles that the LAPD Det. Tom Lange testified to as being, Socal? Those are the questions that I think that you really want to be answering. All of this is in the documentary "Serpents Rising", Socal. I think you really need to see the film. www.serpentsrising.com

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, no it's not necessary to have caught Simpson in those shoes or have them in his possession to know that he wore them at Bundy.
The bloody shoe prints were made by the same size shoes Simpson wore.
The bloody shoe prints were made by expensive shoes that photographs show Simpson wearing.


bobaugust

Bob, your remarks don't square with the facts. There are several photographs of the bloody footprints leading towards the back gate at Bundy. The beauty of the side walk is that it creates a graph effect due to the walkway having the pattern of 11 and 1/2" by 11 and 1/2" square tiles.

Several of the tiles show that the full foot print fits neatly inside with a 1/4" to a 1/2" to spare. This indicates that the total length of the shoe is no more than 11 inches in length. Simpson's foot from heel to toe is approx 12 and 7/8 inches. His foot is almost 2" longer than the shoeprints in the sidewalk tiles. His foot is 1/2" longer than the 12 and a 1/4 inch U2887 Italian size 46/U.S. size 12 Bruno Magli shoe soles.

Finally, the U2887 shoe sole was not only sold to Bruno Magli, it was sold to LORD shoes too and LORD provided its U2887 soles to 19 of its' shoe brands on several continents of the globe. No brand name ever showed up in the blood at Bundy. You need to stop spinning that yarn, Bob...

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by sassylassy

if u dont like it here...then leave! no one is forcing you to stay here and oh yeah dont let the door hit you in the ***** on your way out

bye bye!:punch:

First off, my post wasn't to you. It was to Verin! Moreover, nowhere in my post does it say that "I don't like it here! You are still your same little nasty reincarnated nic self that you when you were on the second OJ Simpson Board.

Do us all a favor ~ Here's you hat! What's your hurry? :punch: :seeya:

JMO and MOO!!

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by socaldiva

Oh please, since when are you "unwilling to fight"? That seems to be the main reason you come here. imo

You have to submit your "plausible theory" in a PM. What a laugh.

I agree Diva. She has done absolutely nothing but be nasty to all of us since she started posting on this Board.

JMO and MOO!!

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by martin II

fbg
you need to give links to these 'QUOTES' you keep posting. otherwise your history of posting here does not allow me to believe any of it without a link imo

at any rate when they voted NOT GUILTY they must have thought the gloved DID NOT FIT.
IMO
MARTIN ii

:lol: :lol: :lol: What a freaking laugh! Whether you give us a link or not (which you don't), WE don't believe anything that you say ~ ever ~ period ~ never ~ nada ~ no way!

Who are you trying to impress? It certainly can't be any of US! So take it elsewhere to others who appreciates it, i.e., Netta/Willie Boy/OJ NUT/Sassylassy/OJisinnocent/Limakey and any other NG that I have left off!

JMO and MOO!!

[Wukong]

Originally posted by Big Ben


There is no question that the bloody prints at Bundy were made by the U2887 shoe sole, but the issue is how would one be able to determine that they were made by Bruno Magli and not one of the other 19 shoe brands owned by LORD Shoes from around the world.

The problem is that only the Bruno Magli with the Silga sole was sold in the United States. Lord sold shoes mainly in Europe, none in the U.S. Only 40 store in the U.S. carried the Bruno Magli and each store typically had only one pair of Bruno Magli with American size 12 Lasts with the size 46 Silga sole. Obviously this is not a very common shoe. But it seems OJ owned a pair, go figure. There was a photograph of him wearing them in a Bills publication 6 months before the murders.

But as you so succinctly pointed out, I can not put OJ in those shoes with 100% certainty. But then again, you can't put anyone else in them either. What I can't figure out is how these rare shoes just happened to be owned by both OJ and the "Killer". What are the odds? Of course unless you are speculating that someone stole OJ's shoes to frame him. If I were trying to frame him, I would have left the shoes somewhere so they would be found. My guess is they are sitting at the bottom of a lake somewhere in So. Cal. as AC told Jennifer Peace. Oh yeah, there's also Mario who has evidence that Rocky threw a bag containing evidence into a lake the day after the murders. That's two references to evidence being at the bottom of a lake. Hmmm.

Speaking of Mario, that was a nice non-answer you gave Sweatpea. Your waiting for him to slow down??? If you know anything about Mario, he hasn't slowed down one day since June 13th 1994.

[Wukong]

Originally posted by Big Ben



"IIRC only 9% of population wears size 12......" Maybe because 91 % of the world, in Asia, Africa, and South America where most of the world lives, barely reach a size beyond that of pygmies, Socal.



You're losing it pretty quick here Doc. I would have thought you'd be above badgering people on message boards.

9% of the AMERICAN population wear size 12. I don't know too many American pygmies:

MR. GOLDBERG: Sir, have there also been studies that have been done related to what percentage of the American population wears a size 12 shoe?
MR. BODZIAK: Yes, there is.
MR. GOLDBERG: And what findings have been made along those lines?
MR. BODZIAK: There's a group called footwear market insights which publishes their study of approximately 260 to 300 million pairs of shoes sold in this country, and they break down the various shoe sizes and widths of the shoes sold, and this is produced for the footwear industry for their use.
MR. GOLDBERG: And what percentage wear size 12 shoes?
MR. BODZIAK: Counting all of the shoes sold, a general percentage is slightly over 9 percent for size 12.

I don't get it Doc. You already posted this:

"There is no question that the bloody prints at Bundy were made by the U2887 shoe sole..."

So why are you posting rants about shoe sizes and OJ's actual foot size? I also recall that Bodziak studied OJ's Reeboks and they were the same size as the Bruno Magli shoe. If OJ's foot was too big for the Bruno Magli, and his Reeboks are the same size as the Bruno Magli, then why is OJ wearing Reeboks that are too small for him? Buddy, next question, you bombed on this one.

[Verin B.]

You know, I was going to be on my way and revert back to my lurker status until I got an amusingly paranoid PM from Holly. Sorry to disappoint you, but I think I may pull up a chair and stay a while. ;) Though I sat through both trials (which was hard to avoid, especially if you lived in California, which is my home state - hey SoCal!), my knowledge of the case isn't as extensive as Mr. August's, but thankfully, there are plenty of resources available to get me back up to speed.

give me a video of oj killing nicole and ron and i am switching sides.

Hello, martin. I was actually surprised to receive such an open-minded response from you. Kudos.

The idea of ng's posting their positions over and over again until they belive them can be true for g's as well. imo. don't you think?


I figured you'd probably attempt to throw that back in my face (see my second post). I would be inclined to agree with you if forensic evidence didn't point to a single logical conclusion (that Orenthal brutally murdered Ron and Nicole), but it does. I'm not the biggest fan of LE, and I don't think they handled the case as well as they could have, but the complexity of the logistics alone required by numerous levels of government to pull a frame job of that magnitude places the theory in the realm of fantasy.

Forget about personalizing it in regard to O.J. Just think about the valuable information that mad scientists have learned about certain reactions of the American public's psyche when and if confronted with a perceived extreme outrage. The OJ matter may have ultimately been a calculated primer for a subsequent major event.

Ben, our government is about as trustworthy as Orenthal himself, and we both know they're not above treachery to achieve their goals. But COME ON, what could possibly be gained from such a risky social experiment? Why vilify a sports figure beloved to people of ALL races (well, up until his history of domestic violence was put out there for all to see) just to "see what happens"? I don't think even the regular NG's here would buy into a conspiracy theory like that.

And no, I'm not going to buy your documentary to find out, sorry (which, IMO, is why you started this thread).

Cheers!

-V.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben



However, here is my answer to the relevant question re.. the Bruno Magli Shoe Prints. Bruno Magli is no more than a brand name that contracted with SILGA GOMMA the rubber shoe sole manufacturer to provide to it rubber soles from SILGA's U2887 rubber mold. At the same time that SILGA provided shoe soles from the U2887 mold to Bruno Magli they were contracted to provid the same shoe soles from that same U2887 rubber mold to LORD and LORD provided their contingent of U2887 rubber soles to 19 shoe brands they owned on several continents of the world.




Big Ben, what evidence do you have that this particular Silga sole was to sold any other company besides Bruno Magli? Bodziak testified differently.

June 19, 1995
Based on these characteristics and the fact that Bruno Magli made these soles -- these soles are uniquely made for them by them exclusively for this shoe, as well as the dyes, which cut out the various shapes and components, which were then stitched together. The independent construction in one factory for Bruno Magli of this upper, combined with the independent design of this contoured sole with these features, in another factory combined, makes this unique.

Q. (BY MR. MEDVENE) You say in another factory. You're saying the soles were made in one factory and
the tops were made in another?

A. For Bruno Magli, and then assembled together.

Q. Based on your -- you were at the factory, weren't you?

A. Yes. The upper was made at the 4C factory; the sole was made at the Silga factory. And they were made by Bruno Magli through those factories and assembled in the 4C factory.

Q. As part of your opinion in your investigation, did you make a determination whether the dye used to make the upper was used in any other shoe?

A. I was told these were not. These were specifically made -- the soles for the bottom of the shoe and the uppers were specifically made for that design and are no longer used.

Q. By each separate factory?

A. Yes, sir. Yes.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben



"IIRC only 9% of population wears size 12......" Maybe because 91 % of the world, in Asia, Africa, and South America where most of the world lives, barely reach a size beyond that of pygmies, Socal.

What does that mean anyway? "Size 12"! Can you tell me quickly, exactly, how many inches is "Size 12", Socal?

The word "Size" does not denote anything specific, the word was used to play on ones proclivity to see guilt and they went no further in examining what they were specifically being told.

How many inches is the alleged metric size 46 SILGA Sole that the FBI agent said represented a U.S. "size 12", Socal? How many inches does Simpson's foot measure, Socal?

How long are the "Bruno Magli" shoe prints inside the square sidewalk tiles at Nicole's residence at 875 South Bundy, Socal? What are the dimensions of those side walk tiles that the LAPD Det. Tom Lange testified to as being, Socal? Those are the questions that I think that you really want to be answering. All of this is in the documentary "Serpents Rising", Socal. I think you really need to see the film. www.serpentsrising.com



Big Ben, Simpson showed the detectives a pair of Reeboks he said he was wearing the day of the murders.

Bodziak compared those size 12 Reeboks to the Bruno Magli shoe size 12, European 46 and they were the same size.

November 20, 1996
Q. Did you have an opportunity to compare a pair of shoes that belonged to Mr. Simpson and the Bruno Magli size 12?
A. Yes, I did.Q. I place before you what's been marked 404, and represent that as a matter of record these are a pair of Reebok shoes, belonging to Mr. Simpson, that he gave to Detective Lange.
(The instrument herein described as Mr. Simpson's Reebok shoes was marked for identification as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 404.)
Q. And I ask you if you compared those shoes with the size 12 Bruno Magli that's contained in Exhibit 395?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And how did you compare that?
A. Yes. I compared the Reebok shoes, left and right Reebok shoes, with the Exhibit 395 Bruno Magli. The Bruno Magli, as I have described, or will describe, these soles are compression molded, they're known as a cup sole, they're sort of like a cup, if you poured water into them, and they're attached to the bottom of the shoe by literally placing the lasted shoe, the completed upper to them, and through glue and stitching they're applied.

The Reebok is a similar construction. It's also a cup sole. It's known as a half cup sole because the toe area -- the middle which is just flat, but the toe area and heel area are cupped. They have variations of this known as cup half cup, three-quarter cup, so forth. So the general construction is compression molded cup sole construction. So even though the Reebok is an athletic sole, its manner of manufacture makes it a comparable shoe to compare with the Bruno Magli.

And I made a comparison of the external sole dimensions -- linear dimensions, and the internal measurement of the shoes, and found that they were virtually identical; that the Bruno Magli shoe and the Reeboks, if you place them one over another, you can line up their soles from heel to toe, left to right, and they fit as well as you could possibly expect.

Q. You're saying Mr. Simpson's shoe was identical to the size 12 Bruno Magli?

A. It's the same size internally. It reads a size 12, U.S. size 12, as well as the European 46, size 12 Bruno Magli, and it's physical dimensions and characteristics for comparability are the same, yes.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben


Bob, your remarks don't square with the facts. There are several photographs of the bloody footprints leading towards the back gate at Bundy. The beauty of the side walk is that it creates a graph effect due to the walkway having the pattern of 11 and 1/2" by 11 and 1/2" square tiles.

Several of the tiles show that the full foot print fits neatly inside with a 1/4" to a 1/2" to spare. This indicates that the total length of the shoe is no more than 11 inches in length. Simpson's foot from heel to toe is approx 12 and 7/8 inches. His foot is almost 2" longer than the shoeprints in the sidewalk tiles. His foot is 1/2" longer than the 12 and a 1/4 inch U2887 Italian size 46/U.S. size 12 Bruno Magli shoe soles.

Finally, the U2887 shoe sole was not only sold to Bruno Magli, it was sold to LORD shoes too and LORD provided its U2887 soles to 19 of its' shoe brands on several continents of the globe. No brand name ever showed up in the blood at Bundy. You need to stop spinning that yarn, Bob...


Big Ben, your measurements of smaller shoe prints are irrelevant. The fact is that all of the bloody shoe prints were made from one pair of shoes. Some of those prints are smaller than others based on how much blood had been transferred from them. The largest shoe print is the one that tells the size of the shoe not the smaller partial prints.

Again I have no idea where you got your information. Bodziak testified that he went to the Silga factory and was told the Silga sole that matched the pattern of the bloody shoe prints was made exclusively for Bruno Magli used only on the Lorenzo style shoes. It was a two part sole. The upper was made in one factory and the lower in another.

bobaugust

[martin II]

V

This is in response to your comment "why vilify a loved sports hero like oj" or something to that effect.

i have posted this before but not to you.
When oj was charged and before the trial even started, a cnn poll showed that 85 % of white america belived oj was guilty. the loved one. These attitudes were maby formed by media reports or by people that did not need trial testimnony and evidence to help them decide. imo


But here are some thoughts on why oj was vilified.
--------------------------------------------

Michael Eric Dyson

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/oj/interviews/dyson.html

Why do you think the public had such strong feelings about the outcome of this case?

I think the O.J. Simpson case conjured all the paranoia, the racial anxiety, but also the racial fatigue that America has endured over the last half century. After all, O.J. was the ideal type character from central casting. If we're going to get a black guy who will conjure empathy and yet produce controversy about race in America, he's got to be a black guy whom white people love and that black people in the past have identified with and at least respected. So his exploits on the athletic gridiron gave him a sense of cachet in black America and white America. His refusal to provoke issues of racial consideration gave him carte blanche, so to speak, in white America. Here was the ideal guy.

Only a guy like O.J. could both appeal to black and whites to see race in a specific fashion. And the reason we invested so much passion in this is because black people had for years been trying to say to white America: "The justice system is broken; you've got to fix it. Here's our best chance to tell that story with a guy that in the past you've been sympathetic to. You'll never hear it with a person for whom you have no sympathy, but you'll hear it in the case of O.J. as much as you're willing to hear it."

Many white people believed: "Look, we're going to show you that we are trusting, and we have reached a high plateau in race relations. We're going to treat O.J. like we treat any other white person in America. If he's guilty, we're going to send him to jail; if he's innocent, we'll let him go." So he was the ideal person to bring out these contrasting viewpoints, but it all broke down.

Broke down how?

Well, it broke down because O.J. refused to follow suit, and black America refused to follow the script, and white America then saw that all bets were off.

O.J. refused to follow through because he claimed his blackness again in a way that was troubling to many white Americans: "Wait a minute, O.J. You haven't talked about blackness in our circles for years, indeed for decades. You've never made us feel uncomfortable about the issue of race. All of a sudden now you're claiming your allegiance to black people. You're identifying publicly with black people."

Black people themselves had to squeeze and squirm. They had to re-inscribe O.J. into the black narrative. They had to baptize him again into the community; they had to accept him. Black people are typically, if you're willing to say you're sorry, always [willing to welcome you back] with open arms: "Come on back home, Michael Jackson. Come on back home, Kobe Bryant. Come on back home, O.J. Simpson."

And then white America said: "Well, wait a minute. We had granted you honorary status, which means you have to play by our rules. You have to accept the reality that race doesn't exist. But now you're saying it exists. You have to accept the reality that race no longer is hugely significant, and it no longer rules America. But now you're saying it does. Well, if you say it does, then we're going to go back to our ways as well." All bets were off with O.J.'s acquittal.

Most liberals thought that by the 1990s, race was no longer much of an issue, but with the O.J. trial, race was suddenly front and center. Was that hard for them to accept?

Sure. Especially for white liberals in the O.J. Simpson case, it was even much more difficult. Right-wingers or conservative brothers and sisters in America who happen to be white perhaps had concluded from the very beginning that O.J. was likely to have committed the crime, whereas white liberals were willing to suspend judgment until such point it was proved in the court of law.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II
V

This is in response to your comment "why vilify a loved sports hero like oj" or something to that effect.

i have posted this before but not to you.
When oj was charged and before the trial even started, a cnn poll showed that 85 % of white america belived oj was guilty. the loved one. These attitudes were maby formed by media reports or by people that did not need trial testimnony and evidence to help them decide. imo





martin II, I disagree.

Most people believed Simpson guilty because of how he acted, running from the police and trying to commit suicide. As the evidence slowly became known those of us who wanted to believe him innocent thought of possible scenarios to account for that evidence. But as more evidence became know every one of those scenarios failed until the only explanation left was that he did it.

The defense tactic of attacking the police claiming evidence was tampered with or planted, or contaminated, or there was some giant conspiracy to frame Simpson was all bull crap. As the criminal trial proceeded those of us who were reasonable thinkers understood the reasonable explanations for the errors and mistakes and laughed at the bull crap the defense was trying to spin. It was obvious they had no legitimate answers for any of the incriminating evidence and they continued to spin when they resorted to playing the race card.

Fuhrman was their main target, but their logic was flawed. There isn't any legitimate evidence that Fuhrman ever did anything illegal in this case. All of their accusations were based only on their claim that Fuhrman was a racist. And because Fuhrman was the one who found some of the evidence, he must have planted it. More bull crap.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, I disagree.

Most people believed Simpson guilty because of how he acted, running from the police and trying to commit suicide. As the evidence slowly became known those of us who wanted to believe him innocent thought of possible scenarios to account for that evidence. But as more evidence became know every one of those scenarios failed until the only explanation left was that he did it.

The defense tactic of attacking the police claiming evidence was tampered with or planted, or contaminated, or there was some giant conspiracy to frame Simpson was all bull crap. As the criminal trial proceeded those of us who were reasonable thinkers understood the reasonable explanations for the errors and mistakes and laughed at the bull crap the defense was trying to spin. It was obvious they had no legitimate answers for any of the incriminating evidence and they continued to spin when they resorted to playing the race card.

Fuhrman was their main target, but their logic was flawed. There isn't any legitimate evidence that Fuhrman ever did anything illegal in this case. All of their accusations were based only on their claim that Fuhrman was a racist. And because Fuhrman was the one who found some of the evidence, he must have planted it. More bull crap.

bobaugust

bob

the cnn poll was taken BEFORE any evidence was presented in court. i am sure you know this. so i don't know whay you are talking about 'AS THE EVIDENCE CAME IN unless you are talking about stuff that was leaked by the prosecution before the trial started.
IMO
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



Big Ben, your measurements of smaller shoe prints are irrelevant. The fact is that all of the bloody shoe prints were made from one pair of shoes. Some of those prints are smaller than others based on how much blood had been transferred from them. The largest shoe print is the one that tells the size of the shoe not the smaller partial prints.

Again I have no idea where you got your information. Bodziak testified that he went to the Silga factory and was told the Silga sole that matched the pattern of the bloody shoe prints was made exclusively for Bruno Magli used only on the Lorenzo style shoes. It was a two part sole. The upper was made in one factory and the lower in another.

bobaugust

bob
what about the sole with LORD (i think it was) that was used.
What about the Japanese shoe company that used the sole mold
to make shoes and shipped them to europe?

there are many shoe DIVERTERS in that industry that make shoes to be distributed in one country/market and then ship them to the us. so it is kinda difficult to know what shoes and how many shoes made from that sole mold were shipped to the u.s. or any
other country. imo
martin II

[martin II]

bob
do you have any comments on Mr Dysons thoughts about why oj may have been vilified?

martinii

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


bob
what about the sole with LORD (i think it was) that was used.
What about the Japanese shoe company that used the sole mold
to make shoes and shipped them to europe?

there are many shoe DIVERTERS in that industry that make shoes to be distributed in one country/market and then ship them to the us. so it is kinda difficult to know what shoes and how many shoes made from that sole mold were shipped to the u.s. or any
other country. imo
martin II



martin II, the sole that left the bloody shoe prints was from Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes. Bodziak testified that the sole was not one piece it was two pieces, upper and lower. Each was made in a different factory.

Maybe one of those pieces may have been distributed to another company but not both. Bodziak testified they were specifically made for Bruno Magli Lorenzo shoes.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


bob

the cnn poll was taken BEFORE any evidence was presented in court. i am sure you know this. so i don't know whay you are talking about 'AS THE EVIDENCE CAME IN unless you are talking about stuff that was leaked by the prosecution before the trial started.
IMO
martin II


martin II, as I explained the reason that most people believed Simpson guilty was because of his actions. Running from the police and trying to commit suicide.

There were rumors of evidence in the media but the actual evidence started becoming known after the Grand Jury.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, as I explained the reason that most people believed Simpson guilty was because of his actions. Running from the police and trying to commit suicide.

There were rumors of evidence in the media but the actual evidence started becoming known after the Grand Jury.

bobaugust

BOB

WELL WHO LEAKED THE GRAND JURY INFO
MARTIN ii

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust




martin II, the sole that left the bloody shoe prints was from Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes. Bodziak testified that the sole was not one piece it was two pieces, upper and lower. Each was made in a different factory.

Maybe one of those pieces may have been distributed to another company but not both. Bodziak testified they were specifically made for Bruno Magli Lorenzo shoes.

bobaugust

BOB
The only part of the shoe that is important was the sold/mold. the uppers can be made of different materials. smooth leather, cloth or plasitc.

the japan company used the mold to make shoes and there is no way to know how many or where they ended up.imo
martinii

[Wukong]

Bob,

I hate to correct you but the mold for the Silga sole was also used for Lord. Lord, however, did not sell any of their shoes in the States. The only difference between the Silga sole for Bruno Magli and Lord was the insert in the mold that identified it as a BM or a Lord. This insert in the mold created a design specific to each brand. It is located between the heel and the ball of the foot and would not show up in a footprint left by the shoe.

MR. BODZIAK: The top three pictures are pictures that I took at the Silga factory in Italy. On the left it shows a bottom and top of a compression mold. The point I'm pointing to, which is to the right or actually in the center of the photograph, is the bottom of the mold and that is the part of the mold which would have the pattern and design and also the logo that says "Bruno Magli" in it. And to the left in the southwest corner of this photograph is the upper, and that would be the portion which puts the design in the back of the sole, sort of a honeycomb design. And just to the right of it, (Indicating), a couple of soles which happened to be there at the time, and this is known as compression molding or an open mold process, because like a waffle iron, they will put the pre-measured rubber in this mold cavity with this portion over top of it and they will mold it. It will melt and conform each time to the exact size and shape features and come out of the mold the same size and shape each time. In the photograph marked B at the top is a close-up showing the heel cavity of one of these molds, and in particular showing the word "Made in Italy" which I previously pointed to on the outsole, which are just in front of the heel. And also there is an oval area and removed--that is normally where the name goes, Bruno Magli, but the slug which is removed is sitting next to that mold and this was the purpose of taking this picture, was to show that this can be removed. The factory has another set of slugs which have the name lord, l-o-r-d, on them and that was the name on the shoe that the national police agency in Japan had identified as part of their reference collection from Europe. There is a little circular area between the heel and the oval area, and this--at this point it is blank, but if these shoe soles were made in Europe, the European size, such as 42, 46, 47, would go there if they desired to have them on the bottoms. There was one other name that they did have that went into this area, I can never remember how to spell it, but it is a-n-t-I-c-a, and I believe the last name is c-o-u-r-I-c-i-a or c-a, and it basically means tradition of fine shoe making in Italian, I'm told, and it was only for the display shoes, they had never sold a shoe with that name on it. And they only had a couple of those slugs. They didn't have them for every mold. On the right under C on the chart, (Indicating), is a compression molding oven, and once the biscuit of rubber has been put in the cavity of the mold and this top has come down and placed on top of it, it will then be pushed into this oven and the oven will close and under heat and pressure it will cause the melting of that biscuit of rubber and the resultant rubber sole in the same size and shape each time. I obtained a pair of these size 46 soles and hand carried them to the Silga factory--I'm sorry--the 4C factory.

http://simpson.walraven.org/jun19.html

[martin II]

Originally posted by Wukong
Bob,

I hate to correct you but the mold for the Silga sole was also used for Lord. Lord, however, did not sell any of their shoes in the States. The only difference between the Silga sole for Bruno Magli and Lord was the insert in the mold that identified it as a BM or a Lord. This insert in the mold created a design specific to each brand. It is located between the heel and the ball of the foot and would not show up in a footprint left by the shoe.

MR. BODZIAK: The top three pictures are pictures that I took at the Silga factory in Italy. On the left it shows a bottom and top of a compression mold. The point I'm pointing to, which is to the right or actually in the center of the photograph, is the bottom of the mold and that is the part of the mold which would have the pattern and design and also the logo that says "Bruno Magli" in it. And to the left in the southwest corner of this photograph is the upper, and that would be the portion which puts the design in the back of the sole, sort of a honeycomb design. And just to the right of it, (Indicating), a couple of soles which happened to be there at the time, and this is known as compression molding or an open mold process, because like a waffle iron, they will put the pre-measured rubber in this mold cavity with this portion over top of it and they will mold it. It will melt and conform each time to the exact size and shape features and come out of the mold the same size and shape each time. In the photograph marked B at the top is a close-up showing the heel cavity of one of these molds, and in particular showing the word "Made in Italy" which I previously pointed to on the outsole, which are just in front of the heel. And also there is an oval area and removed--that is normally where the name goes, Bruno Magli, but the slug which is removed is sitting next to that mold and this was the purpose of taking this picture, was to show that this can be removed. The factory has another set of slugs which have the name lord, l-o-r-d, on them and that was the name on the shoe that the national police agency in Japan had identified as part of their reference collection from Europe. There is a little circular area between the heel and the oval area, and this--at this point it is blank, but if these shoe soles were made in Europe, the European size, such as 42, 46, 47, would go there if they desired to have them on the bottoms. There was one other name that they did have that went into this area, I can never remember how to spell it, but it is a-n-t-I-c-a, and I believe the last name is c-o-u-r-I-c-i-a or c-a, and it basically means tradition of fine shoe making in Italian, I'm told, and it was only for the display shoes, they had never sold a shoe with that name on it. And they only had a couple of those slugs. They didn't have them for every mold. On the right under C on the chart, (Indicating), is a compression molding oven, and once the biscuit of rubber has been put in the cavity of the mold and this top has come down and placed on top of it, it will then be pushed into this oven and the oven will close and under heat and pressure it will cause the melting of that biscuit of rubber and the resultant rubber sole in the same size and shape each time. I obtained a pair of these size 46 soles and hand carried them to the Silga factory--I'm sorry--the 4C factory.

http://simpson.walraven.org/jun19.html

wukong
you are correct the imprint of the slug would not show if the print was from bm or lord unless the area next to the hell made contact.
martin II

[fbgweezer]

Originally posted by martin II


wukong
you are correct the imprint of the slug would not show if the print was from bm or lord unless the area next to the hell made contact.
martin II martin you crack me up! You cannot even discuss intelligently anything about the shoes and then post your idiotic, "Yeah, that's the ticket." LOL :lol:

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
martin you crack me up! You cannot even discuss intelligently anything about the shoes and then post your idiotic, "Yeah, that's the ticket." LOL :lol:

fbg

you have no idea as to what or why i posted what i did.

wukong made a statement that corrected bob on the issue that the sole in question was only used on bm shoes. it was used for the Lord shoe also.imo
so what are you talking about now??
martin II

[martin II]

fbg

The slug on the sole that made the name bm or lord was next to the heel on the sole. Neither of these names bm or lord would be seen in any footprint if the area next to the heel did not make contact with the blood at bundy.

That is why the bloody foot prints at bundy did not show the bm
mark in the bloody footprints. imo

Now that may be too difficult for you to understand.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust




martin II, the sole that left the bloody shoe prints was from Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes. Bodziak testified that the sole was not one piece it was two pieces, upper and lower. Each was made in a different factory.

Maybe one of those pieces may have been distributed to another company but not both. Bodziak testified they were specifically made for Bruno Magli Lorenzo shoes.

bobaugust

bob

The great majority of all shoes are made in two parts.
1. uppers
2. soles.

Different uppers made from different materials can be put on the same sole. A special sole can be made by a contract company and sold to many shoe companies that apply different looking uppers to the sole to create a new shoe.

An example would be that the special mold used to make the bm shoe sole can also be used to make the lord shoe sole.

The end results would be two shoe models with different uppers but the same sole. imo

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Wukong
Bob,

I hate to correct you but the mold for the Silga sole was also used for Lord. Lord, however, did not sell any of their shoes in the States. The only difference between the Silga sole for Bruno Magli and Lord was the insert in the mold that identified it as a BM or a Lord. This insert in the mold created a design specific to each brand. It is located between the heel and the ball of the foot and would not show up in a footprint left by the shoe.





Wukong, thanks, I stand corrected

The most incriminating part of this is when Simpson claimed he never owned a pair of those shoes and then claimed the Scull and Flammer photographs were fake. Simpson's lies confirm his guilt.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



Wukong, thanks, I stand corrected

The most incriminating part of this is when Simpson claimed he never owned a pair of those shoes and then claimed the Scull and Flammer photographs were fake. Simpson's lies confirm his guilt.

bobaugust

bob

does this mean that you understand and agree that there was at least two shoe models made and sold using the same special sole that bm used?
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


bob

does this mean that you understand and agree that there was at least two shoe models made and sold using the same special sole that bm used?
martin II


martin II, I respect Wukong's opinion and I believe Bodziak's testimony.

Yes, I agree that the Silga sole was sold to Lord who sold shoes mainly in Europe. Based on how rare these shoes were doesn't change any of the evidence that Simpson was at Bundy, not anyone else. Nor does it change the fact that Simpson owned a pair of these shoes before the murders. Nor does it change the fact that Simpson lied under oath to hide that fact.

bobaugust

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by Wukong

<snipped>

My guess is they are sitting at the bottom of a lake somewhere in So. Cal. as AC told Jennifer Peace. Oh yeah, there's also Mario who has evidence that Rocky threw a bag containing evidence into a lake the day after the murders. That's two references to evidence being at the bottom of a lake. Hmmm.

<snipped>

Wukong, question: There aren't that many lakes in Southern California. The State of California is a different matter (of course), but if we knew where Rocky was camping, we could pinpoint the lake pretty easy.

If Mario "has evidence that Rocky threw a bag containing evidence into a lake the day after the murders," why didn't he alert the LAPD, who I am sure would have dredged the lake to find this extremely important evidence? I don't know Mario from Adam, but this important information seems like a bombshell to me and I am pretty skeptical that something wasn't done about it. :shrug:

Also, if AC's girlfriend told her that "evidence was sitting at the bottom of a lake," why wasn't he interrogated by the LAPD? And why was he allowed to go on his merry way without so much as being charged as an "accessory to murder, double-murder?" :shrug:

JMO and MOO!!

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, I respect Wukong's opinion and I believe Bodziak's testimony.

Yes, I agree that the Silga sole was sold to Lord who sold shoes mainly in Europe. Based on how rare these shoes were doesn't change any of the evidence that Simpson was at Bundy, not anyone else. Nor does it change the fact that Simpson owned a pair of these shoes before the murders. Nor does it change the fact that Simpson lied under oath to hide that fact.

bobaugust

bob

so it is possible that the killer could have been wearing a shoe made by LORDS if he in fact did purchase the lords model someplace. imo
martin II

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by socaldiva

:confused: :shrug:

I agree Diva! I didn't want to dignify her post with any kind of response. Ignorance is really "bliss" isn't it? LOL!

JMO and MOO!!

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


bob

so it is possible that the killer could have been wearing a shoe made by LORDS if he in fact did purchase the lords model someplace. imo
martin II



martin II, no not very possible at all.

The reality is that all of the evidence tells us there were only three people at Bundy that night, the two victims and Simpson. There is no relevant physical evidence that points to anyone else.

The fact is that Bruno Magli Lorenzo shoes are consistent with making those bloody shoe prints. We know that Simpson wore those exact size and make shoes. The fact that Simpson lied under oath about wearing Bruno Magli Lorenzo shoes he was shown wearing in a photograph and was then impeached by thirty additional authenticated photographs confirms his guilt.

bobaugust

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by socaldiva

Yeah, that's the ticket. Someone visiting from Europe (in Orenthal's shoe size) killed Nicole & Ron. :rolleyes:

:lol: Hysterical!

:beer: Excellent Diva!

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust

*Snipped*

There is no relevant physical evidence that points to anyone else.


bobaugust


August,

What do you offer as proof, there was NO evidence pointing to someone other than OJ and the 2 victims at Bundy?

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by nettathirty

August,

What do you offer as proof, there was NO evidence pointing to someone other than OJ and the 2 victims at Bundy?

Since you never offer "proof" of anything, I hope that Bob does the same. Haven't you said in the past that OJ wasn't even at Bundy the night of the murders? I guess you have changed your mind and come to your (common) senses!

JMO and MOO!!

[socaldiva]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8
*snip*

Haven't you said in the past that OJ wasn't even at Bundy the night of the murders? I guess you have changed your mind and come to your (common) senses!



He changed his mind, but I don't know that I'd say he's come to his senses. Last I recall, he claimes OJ was there but only to throw the track off of the drug dealers. He was preserving Nicole's image. He's a flippin' hero :rolleyes: Isn't that a hoot? :)

[socaldiva]

Originally posted by nettathirty



August,

What do you offer as proof, there was NO evidence pointing to someone other than OJ and the 2 victims at Bundy?

Did you see the defense offer up anyone's DNA other than OJ's? Nope. There's your proof. DUH!

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



August,

What do you offer as proof, there was NO evidence pointing to someone other than OJ and the 2 victims at Bundy?




nettathirty, you have it backwards again. What relevant physical evidence do you know of that points to anyone else?

bobaugust

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust



nettathirty, you have it backwards again. What relevant physical evidence do you know of that points to anyone else?

bobaugust


August,

Ok! What is the proof?

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by socaldiva


Did you see the defense offer up anyone's DNA other than OJ's? Nope. There's your proof. DUH!



Socaldiva,

Duh... I take it, you and August have "NO" proof, that there was somebody else, other than OJ and the 2 victims at Bundy...

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by nettathirty

August,

Ok! What is the proof?

Baiting Question No. 2020! You know very well what the "proof" is you *****!

As with anything else OJ, it has been discussed many, many times ~ ad nauseum!

JMO and MOO!!

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8


Baiting Question No. 2020! You know very well what the "proof" is you *****!

As with anything else OJ, it has been discussed many, many times ~ ad nauseum!

JMO and MOO!!


2L8,

Again, NO PROOF.. Just hostility, what a freeking ***t you are!


imo jmho

[Wukong]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8


Wukong, question: There aren't that many lakes in Southern California. The State of California is a different matter (of course), but if we knew where Rocky was camping, we could pinpoint the lake pretty easy.

If Mario "has evidence that Rocky threw a bag containing evidence into a lake the day after the murders," why didn't he alert the LAPD, who I am sure would have dredged the lake to find this extremely important evidence? I don't know Mario from Adam, but this important information seems like a bombshell to me and I am pretty skeptical that something wasn't done about it. :shrug:

Also, if AC's girlfriend told her that "evidence was sitting at the bottom of a lake," why wasn't he interrogated by the LAPD? And why was he allowed to go on his merry way without so much as being charged as an "accessory to murder, double-murder?" :shrug:

JMO and MOO!!

2L8,

The LAPD and the FBI both spoke to Mario. They are well aware of the stories about evidence "being with the fishies" as AC said to Jennifer. This is a HUGE bombshell and you are right to question why the authorities never followed up.

There is a whole lot more that went on before, during and after the murders that were never introduced in the trial, never followed up on and many things that were covered up by both sides. Not everything about this case is in the transcripts; not by a long shot. To understand all the dynamics you need to dig deeper than the transcripts.

Try to find Jennifer Peace's deposition. You won't find it and you have to ask; why? AC was grilled about Jennifer and he just denied it; he said, she said. Here is a sample from AC depo. (AC claims he never said anything about evidence being with the fishies to her or Allen Austin for that matter):

Q: For example, Jennifer Peace?

A: You got to be joking.

Q:—there was just a discussion with Mr. Cowlings concerning conversations he had with her with respect to the location of a knife, clothes that he may have been wearing, et cetera.

MR.RE: That is what Jennifer Peace said?

R.BREWER: Right.

MR.RE: That is not what he said.

R.BREWER: But he was asked about discussions with her wherein he said this to her at the deposition.

R.RE: But he said that never happened. So what I am saying to you is, you are asking him now was there an event where he spoke to somebody about that evidence, and I am telling you that he will assert the privilege to this. The other question was did you say this to Jennifer Peace, and he said no, I never said that to Jennifer Peace. There is no privilege to that.

MR.BREWER: How about a question, did you tell Allen Austin did you have any discussions with Allen Austin with respect to the location of evidence, a question like that?

MR.LEONARD:I am going to object to that question.

MR.BREWER: You can object to it. I want to figure out what his position is.

MR.RE: At this point - Jennifer Peace is a very different animal.

THE WITNESS: It's a joke.

MR.BREWER:I am not saying it is a joke. I am talking about the privilege. It is only the question I am concerned about.

MR.RE: The reason we let him go ahead with regard to Jennifer Peace is because that is one of the areas that he said at the very beginning of the deposition he wanted to clear up and testify about. When we are talking about anybody else, asking anybody in general or in specific did you talk about the evidence in the case, he is going to assert a privilege to that.

http://walraven.org/simpson/ac_depo4.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

They could discredit Jennifer Peace, the porn star, but not Allen Austin, which is why they asserted priveledge with regards to him.

Chris Darden talks about AC and Jennifer in his book "In contempt.

Rocky Batemen was covered up by both sides in this case; he was a big problem for both sides. There are Guilties and not guilties alike on this board who try to discredit Rocky, just like the prosecution and the defense. You might want to ask these people why. I can't figure out why both sides on this board trash Mario and discount anything about Rocky Bateman.

A few tidbits about Rocky:

Rocky was filmed by a TV crew at Rockingham the day after the murders (maybe the 14th, can't recall) leaving with two bags that he didn't arrive with. This was after someone had already delivered another bag to him where he was camping, which he promptly threw in the lake (either Piru or Pyramid). Rocky left town shortly after and Ron Ito said he couldn't find him. But then he shows up and does an interview with CNN??

Rocky is a guy that, at the time, didn't have two pennies to rub together and then suddenly he has a $5,000 wad in his pocket, he's driving a brand new Corvette and then soon owns his own Limo company.

You may also ask yourself why Bill Wasz was never mentioned during the trial. Why Kardashian hired him to steal Paula's car, follow Nicole and asked to Wasz to kill her.

2L8, there are a lot of unanswered questions concerning this case that need to be brought out and discussed in an objective manner. I find it very difficult to get anyone on this, or any other board, to do exactly that. I had to laugh when Big Ben says he wants to discuss the case objectively when he obviously is not objective at all.

[sweet pea 15]

Originally posted by Big Ben


Your points are well taken sweet pea, and I am open to hearing Mario's position when he slows down to provide it and that's where it lies at this point. Furthermore, the OMIG investigative group did an excellent job uncovering powerful evidence that is little more basic and direct in pointing to malfeasance in the Simpson case. But I do believe with bird dogs willing to do their due diligence, like that which you are sharing, this magnificent fraud will ultimately unravel. I just hope that all the principals will stop dying so that we can put the question to them at the appointed time.

When Mario slows down? HE CAN NOT SLOW DOWN!!! Did you see the picture of what those two LAPD officers did to him? He has had to look over his shoulder for at least 11 years. Eleven years of not knowing if these despicable people that tried to kill him are going to try to do it again. Eleven years of trying to keep his family safe. Eleven years of trying to stay alive long enough to get some justice for himself.
And all because he tried to do the right thing. He put his life on the line for someone else. People he didn't even know. How many people do you know that would do that?

mgn3d@yahoo.com

sweet pea

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by Wukong


The problem is that only the Bruno Magli with the Silga sole was sold in the United States. Lord sold shoes mainly in Europe, none in the U.S.


In Regard to the Bruno Magli/U2887 soles:

So if I'm correctly following your presumption, Wukong, it would be rare to nonexistent that anyone else in the world wearing U2887 shoe soles attached to the bottoms of any of the other 19 LORD shoe brands sold around the world, could have come to America by plane, ship, or even walked across the U.S.- Mexican border and been standing around in the State of California (Los Angeles) on June 12,1994 with these soles on their feet?

Have I gathered your premise as acurate as it appears to read?

P.S. Wukong, F.Y.I.: LORD sold shoe brands in South America, Europe, Asia and Africa. It was the Japanese National Police Dept. that , according to FBI Spec. Agent Wm Bodziac, first alerted them to the U2887 shoe sole match from their Japanese data bank, and sent the FBI a shoe sole with the LORD brand name plugged into the sole. It appears that they may have been more common than you'd like to believe outside of Europe, Wukong.

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by sweet pea 15


When Mario slows down? HE CAN NOT SLOW DOWN!!! Did you see the picture of what those two LAPD officers did to him? He has had to look over his shoulder for at least 11 years.
mgn3d@yahoo.com
sweet pea

Where do you think that he wants to go with the whole matter relative to his story? My recommendation to him would be to narrow his scope, and determine if he has a cause of action for what was done to him, then gather his supportive coalition and move straight forward, and decisively.

Based upon what little he has shared it may be difficult for him to comprehend or desire to move proactively forward in an objective manner. Never-the-less, he last said that he would continue his presentation at a later date, and I have no reason not to consider him to be a man of his word.

[martin II]

Originally posted by Big Ben


In Regard to the Bruno Magli/U2887 soles:

So if I'm correctly following your presumption, Wukong, it would be rare to nonexistent that anyone else in the world wearing U2887 shoe soles attached to the bottoms of any of the other 19 LORD shoe brands sold around the world, could have come to America by plane, ship, or even walked across the U.S.- Mexican border and been standing around in the State of California (Los Angeles) on June 12,1994 with these soles on their feet?

Have I gathered your premise as acurate as it appears to read?

P.S. Wukong, F.Y.I.: LORD sold shoe brands in South America, Europe, Asia and Africa. It was the Japanese National Police Dept. that , according to FBI Spec. Agent Wm Bodziac, first alerted them to the U2887 shoe sole match from their Japanese data bank, and sent the FBI a shoe sole with the LORD brand name plugged into the sole. It appears that they may have been more common than you'd like to believe outside of Europe, Wukong.

Ben

it would be very common that shoes manufactured in japan and destined for Africa would leave Japan and arrive at the port of long beach CA. DIVERSION is a common method used by many big name discounters in america. imo
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by sassylassy


only 299 pairs of Bruno Maglis were sold in the USA

sassylassy

what we don't know is how many Lord shoes with the same sole as the bm reached the u.s.imo
martin II

[martin II]

wukong

j peace was the lady that AC dumped before she made this claim about what he said. Also AC took the 5th on all issues related to evidence not just what j peace said. right.

ps
i think ben has given Mario good advice on the corse he should take if he has all this evidence. imo

martin II

[martin II]

wukong

When the fbi interviewed mario about the dumping of evidence in that lake by rocky in la did they just ignore this info as did the la da's office?
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



August,

Ok! What is the proof?


nettathirty, do you see the word "proof" anywhere in my post?

I said all of the relevant physical evidence points to Simpson and only Simpson as the killer. Nothing points to anyone else. Nothing eliminates Simpson.

If you think you know of some relevant physical evidence that points to someone other than Simpson then by all means inform us.

bobaugust

[limakey]

A major problem with this case is that too many people give some of the witnesses, mainly the state's witnesses super human powers.

Dennis Fung and Andrea Mozzola were taped during their collection of the evidence. Mozzola was taped sitting down and closing her eyes because she was so tired. Dennis Fung was taped doing things he insisted he didn't do and then he was taped not doing things that he insisted he did. Either way, it is clear that both of these techs were simply in over their heads on this case. With the detectives and the media breathing down their throats, I can understand why this was such a stressful situation.

Yet, even while knowing this, why are they being given the super human power of being able to cave into the pressure of their mistakes or their alleged mistakes? Perfect example, Andrea Mozzola and her initials on the envelope. There was a reason she testified that she wrote her initials on the coin envelopes, or at least thought she did because she was newly trained. This was not a new trained mistake, she was taught just how important the chain of evidence is and what are the weakest links of it.

When it was "pointed" out to her that she didn't do what she said she did, how do we know what her reaction was to this? Did she tell her bosses that she knew she did, that she wouldn't make this mistake? And what if they then pull out the video tape and just show her just how tired she was? Just how much pressure she was under, even knowing the cameras were rolling?

I'm sorry, but any normal person, looking at their job performance on that tape, the circus surroundings of the media, the helipcopters flying overhead would have serious doubts about anything they said they did during their job performance. In other words, Mozzola may have been positive she wrote her initials on that envelope but spending a little time with her own side could have convinced her she didn't.

Remember, if she is positive that she did this and said so to her bosses, then what is she really telling them---that someone did in fact tamper not only with the evidence, but with her work. Another thing to remember is that she went through a lot of training for this job, one that she is still doing, so would she risk her career and her job by insisting that she did write her leave her mark on the envelopes when her bosses were saying she didn't?

And Dennis Fung. Hank Goldberg said he prepared Fung for hours for his testimony knowing the would not make a good witness---why is that? During the civil trial Fung later wasn't even sure about the glove---until he was taken into the hallway and give Simpson trial evidence 101 retraining on it.

There is no reason to trust any of their work. It is understandable that both Fung and Mozzola would have said and did anything to save face, to save their jobs and save their careers. It is also understandable on how both of these state employees would not even want to think who could have tampered with the evidence. If Mozzola and Fung insisted on certain issues to their bosses, their insistence is more like an accusation that someone did tamper with the evidence.

[Wukong]

Originally posted by Big Ben


In Regard to the Bruno Magli/U2887 soles:

So if I'm correctly following your presumption, Wukong, it would be rare to nonexistent that anyone else in the world wearing U2887 shoe soles attached to the bottoms of any of the other 19 LORD shoe brands sold around the world, could have come to America by plane, ship, or even walked across the U.S.- Mexican border and been standing around in the State of California (Los Angeles) on June 12,1994 with these soles on their feet?

Have I gathered your premise as acurate as it appears to read?

P.S. Wukong, F.Y.I.: LORD sold shoe brands in South America, Europe, Asia and Africa. It was the Japanese National Police Dept. that , according to FBI Spec. Agent Wm Bodziac, first alerted them to the U2887 shoe sole match from their Japanese data bank, and sent the FBI a shoe sole with the LORD brand name plugged into the sole. It appears that they may have been more common than you'd like to believe outside of Europe, Wukong.

Ben,

Of course Lord shoes could also have made it into the States by other avenues beside retail stores. But the BM and Lord shoes with the Silga sole certainly were not very common at all. Again, this is all an exercise in futility, but I'll play along because I like mental masturbation.

Let's look at this statistically: Take all the Bruno Magli and Lord shoes with Silga soles in size 12 (or 46 if you like) either purchased or bought outside the country or even illegally smuggled in by the boatload, as Martin suggests (Martin, no shoes with Silga soles were made in Japan, they were all made in Italy). What percentage, of the 9% of the size 12 wearing population, was wearing shoes with these soles? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say 0.01%, which is extremely generous; equaling about 2,700 people nationwide (remember, there were only about 300 pair of Bruno Magli sold). If we equal these out around the U.S. that would mean about 56 pair in the state of California. I'll be generous again and say there were 10 pair in L.A. county. How many of these 10 people had a connection to Nicole Simpson? Then how many of these people had a motive to kill Nicole Simpson? And to finish it off, how many of these people was known to own a pair of shoes with the Silga sole?

I could play this game all day! This is fun, but doesn't give us 100% proof positive of anything. And this is what you are asking for? Proof positive? I'll go with the statistics and say OJ was wearing shoes with the Silga sole when he killed Nicole and Ron.

Brian

[Wukong]

Originally posted by martin II
wukong

j peace was the lady that AC dumped before she made this claim about what he said. Also AC took the 5th on all issues related to evidence not just what j peace said. right.

ps
i think ben has given Mario good advice on the corse he should take if he has all this evidence. imo

martin II

So you're saying that because AC dumped her we shouldn't believe what she said?

I don't believe that either you or Ben have any say in what Mario should or shouldn't do.

[Wukong]

Originally posted by martin II
wukong

When the fbi interviewed mario about the dumping of evidence in that lake by rocky in la did they just ignore this info as did the la da's office?
martin II

No, the FBI was very interested and spent 1 1/2 hours talking to Mario about this. They decided to switch tactics and go after the Wasz/Kardashian and Kardashian/OJ illegal gambling and porn businesses instead.

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by Wukong


Ben,

Of course Lord shoes could also have made it into the States by other avenues beside retail stores. But the BM and Lord shoes with the Silga sole certainly were not very common at all. Again, this is all an exercise in futility, but I'll play along because I like mental masturbation.


Wukong, I think that you are being very gracious in referring to your thought processes as being mental masturbation.

Had the FBI, who noted this, and anyone else in the court room pointed this fact out it would have shot a cannon sized hole in the whole sensationalized presentation regarding the bloody shoeprints.

This alone caused us to acquire copies of the Italian SILGA size 46 U2887 shoe soles and they simply do not measure up to what a typical size 12 U.S. does. So here again we need to be pressing these folks for explanations. Unfortunately Wm. Bodziak is alleged to have retired from the FBI at age 46, I'd like to speak to him about some of the irregularities associated with the soe prints.

[martin II]

Originally posted by limakey
A major problem with this case is that too many people give some of the witnesses, mainly the state's witnesses super human powers.

Dennis Fung and Andrea Mozzola were taped during their collection of the evidence. Mozzola was taped sitting down and closing her eyes because she was so tired. Dennis Fung was taped doing things he insisted he didn't do and then he was taped not doing things that he insisted he did. Either way, it is clear that both of these techs were simply in over their heads on this case. With the detectives and the media breathing down their throats, I can understand why this was such a stressful situation.

Yet, even while knowing this, why are they being given the super human power of being able to cave into the pressure of their mistakes or their alleged mistakes? Perfect example, Andrea Mozzola and her initials on the envelope. There was a reason she testified that she wrote her initials on the coin envelopes, or at least thought she did because she was newly trained. This was not a new trained mistake, she was taught just how important the chain of evidence is and what are the weakest links of it.

When it was "pointed" out to her that she didn't do what she said she did, how do we know what her reaction was to this? Did she tell her bosses that she knew she did, that she wouldn't make this mistake? And what if they then pull out the video tape and just show her just how tired she was? Just how much pressure she was under, even knowing the cameras were rolling?

I'm sorry, but any normal person, looking at their job performance on that tape, the circus surroundings of the media, the helipcopters flying overhead would have serious doubts about anything they said they did during their job performance. In other words, Mozzola may have been positive she wrote her initials on that envelope but spending a little time with her own side could have convinced her she didn't.

Remember, if she is positive that she did this and said so to her bosses, then what is she really telling them---that someone did in fact tamper not only with the evidence, but with her work. Another thing to remember is that she went through a lot of training for this job, one that she is still doing, so would she risk her career and her job by insisting that she did write her leave her mark on the envelopes when her bosses were saying she didn't?

And Dennis Fung. Hank Goldberg said he prepared Fung for hours for his testimony knowing the would not make a good witness---why is that? During the civil trial Fung later wasn't even sure about the glove---until he was taken into the hallway and give Simpson trial evidence 101 retraining on it.

There is no reason to trust any of their work. It is understandable that both Fung and Mozzola would have said and did anything to save face, to save their jobs and save their careers. It is also understandable on how both of these state employees would not even want to think who could have tampered with the evidence. If Mozzola and Fung insisted on certain issues to their bosses, their insistence is more like an accusation that someone did tamper with the evidence.

limakey

Mozzola did put her name on the envelopes initially. But was forced to deny it when she was caught.

SOMETHING WAS WRONG.
Martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by Wukong


So you're saying that because AC dumped her we shouldn't believe what she said?

I don't believe that either you or Ben have any say in what Mario should or shouldn't do.

wukong

Yes it is a good reason to believe that j piece was pissed and made the ac statement up.

Are you getting sensative about old mario?

Look. you posted the same old old old stuff about marios situation
it has been 11 years and he does not seem to have made any progress.

wukong, i have no interest in having any say in marios current or future actions. Until he steps forward with his PROOF he is just a
person with a story that has not backed up any of it. To the public that is. It is like a 11 year fantasy play with the scrip all in marios head.

imo

martin II

[martin II]

wukong
Your little tap dance with statistics was just that. It means little because you use the assumption that because bm only made 300
pair that lord followed suit a d made only 300 pair. especially if lord did ship the shoes to countires other than europe. imo

it dosen't matter if the shoes were made in japan or not, they can still be diverted to the u.s.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by Wukong


No, the FBI was very interested and spent 1 1/2 hours talking to Mario about this. They decided to switch tactics and go after the Wasz/Kardashian and Kardashian/OJ illegal gambling and porn businesses instead.

wukong

The FBI can deal with more than one case at a time you know.

i guess after 1 1/2 hours with mario and no proof of anything i guess the FBI decided to leave and go deal with reality cases. imo
martin II

[martin II]

limakey

my post should have read Mazzola changed her testimony when
she saw her initials were no longer on the envelopes presented in court.. not when she was caught.
martin II

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by bobaugust



Big Ben, your measurements of smaller shoe prints are irrelevant.

Oh no, I don't think the point is irrelevant, Bob. The prints are fully robust, and clear, they indicate they're not the presumed prints left by a large individual the size of Simpson. In hindsight, I think that you would be in the same desperate situation that Chris Darden was in, arguing irrelevancy of size, if the point was displayed before a jury.

Bodziak testified that he went to the Silga factory and was told the Silga sole that matched the pattern of the bloody shoe prints was made exclusively for Bruno Magli used only on the Lorenzo style shoes.

However, he stated in the 2nd edition of his college text book on evidence, that SILGA sold the same U2887 produced soles to LORD, and pointed out that LORD owned 19 shoe brands around the world.

FBI special agent Bodziak wasn't the only one to have significant disparities in his testimony versus what he said in his book. There are others who did the same as well. All of the needless irregularities in this case point to one massive conclusion: FRAUD, MALFEASANCE, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE for some abstract pecuniary interest.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


limakey

Mozzola did put her name on the envelopes initially. But was forced to deny it when she was caught.

SOMETHING WAS WRONG.
Martin II


martin II, the only thing wrong about this is your inability to understand what you're offering your opinion about.

The fact that Mazzola initially believed she had initialed the coin envelopes is irrelevant. She realized she was mistaken when she later saw the envelopes didn't have her initials on them.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben


Oh no, I don't think the point is irrelevant, Bob. The prints are fully robust, and clear, they indicate they're not the presumed prints left by a large individual the size of Simpson. In hindsight, I think that you would be in the same desperate situation that Chris Darden was in, arguing irrelevancy of size, if the point was displayed before a jury.




Big Ben, you're quickly losing credibility with these kinds of comments. But then again I'm sorry to say anyone who believes in the fantasy that Juditha Brown called Nicole about 11:00 the night of the murders doesn't have very much credibility to start with.

All of the bloody shoe prints found at Bundy came from one person. Partial shoe prints in blood do not tell us the size of the that shoe unless you are able to account for the portions that did not transfer blood. A large shoe will leave a smaller transfer based on how much blood was left on the shoe and transferred. A smaller shoe doesn't leave a larger shoe print then it's size.

The fact is that the bloody shoe prints left by the killer were later identified by Bodziak to be consistent with being made by size 12 Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes. Later in the this case a photograph surfaced, the Scull photograph, showing Simpson wearing those exact same kind of shoes. Simpson's shoe size was size 12.

Simpson denied that he was wearing those shoes calling the photograph a fake. In the civil trial 30 more photographs were presented taken by another photographer on the same day Scull had taken his photograph. All thirty photographs showed Simpson wearing the same clothing and the exact same Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes that the Scull photograph showed.

The thirty Flammer negatives and photographs were authenticated by an expert and confirmed the authenticity of the Scull photograph as well as impeaching Simpson's lies that he wasn't wearing those shoes.

Simpson lied to hide the fact that he was at Bundy the night of the murders. The fact is that all of the relevant physical evidence found at Bundy points to only three people, the two victims and Simpson. Nothing points to anyone else. Nothing eliminates Simpson.

The fact that there were other shoes manufactured using the same soles as the Bruno Magli shoes is irreverent to the evidence found at Bundy that proves Simpson guilty.

bobaugust.

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, the only thing wrong about this is your inability to understand what you're offering your opinion about.

The fact that Mazzola initially believed she had initialed the coin envelopes is irrelevant. She realized she was mistaken when she later saw the envelopes didn't have her initials on them.

bobaugust

bob
i am sure Mazzola prepared herself prior to her testimony. She knew what she did do and did not do. i assume she made work notes as she performed her duties.

As usual you call this problem only a small mistake on her part as you do with all of the problems with prosecutions witnesse's lies. imo

Prosection witnesses make mistakes. oj always tells only lies.
nonsense.
martin II

[martin II]

bob

there is no physical proof that the foot prints made at bundy were made by B.M. shoes and not a Lords shoe that had the same shoe sole. imo
martin II

[martin II]

ben

Bodziak testified that he went to the Silga factory and was told the Silga sole that matched the pattern of the bloody shoe prints was made exclusively for Bruno Magli used only on the Lorenzo style shoes.

However, he stated in the 2nd edition of his college text book on evidence, that SILGA sold the same U2887 produced soles to LORD, and pointed out that LORD owned 19 shoe brands around the world.
------------------------------
To me your post means that Bodziak held back the information about Silga selling the same soles they sold to BM, to Lord who had 19 shoe brands around the world when he testified. imo

martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


bob
i am sure Mazzola prepared herself prior to her testimony. She knew what she did do and did not do. i assume she made work notes as she performed her duties.

As usual you call this problem only a small mistake on her part as you do with all of the problems with prosecutions witnesse's lies. imo

Prosection witnesses make mistakes. oj always tells only lies.
nonsense.
martin II


martin II, much ado about nothing.

Mazzola explained that she mistaken believed she initialed the coin envelopes in the Simpson case because that's what was done in the case she was on before the Simpson case.

The fact is that her mistaken recollection was irrelevant. The relevant fact is that the bindles inside those coin envelopes were identified with her handwriting on them.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II
bob

there is no physical proof that the foot prints made at bundy were made by B.M. shoes and not a Lords shoe that had the same shoe sole. imo
martin II


martin II, the bloody shoe prints at Bundy are consistent with being made by Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes, size 12

Simpson wore size 12 shoes and owned Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes.

Just another piece in the puzzle that tells us who the killer was. Nothing points to anyone else. Nothing eliminates Simpson.

bobaugust

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, the bloody shoe prints at Bundy are consistent with being made by Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes, size 12

Simpson wore size 12 shoes and owned Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes.

Just another piece in the puzzle that tells us who the killer was. Nothing points to anyone else. Nothing eliminates Simpson.

bobaugust


August,

If you had been "TOLD" the shoe that made the print was the "Lord" shoe and not Bruno Magli.. You would be making the same case for the "Lord" shoe.. Face it August, it's starting to unfold and everyday you are realizing how wrong and mislead you were about the (items) and the murders at 875 Bundy Dr on 12 June 94...

You are getting close, just let it happen!

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



August,

If you had been "TOLD" the shoe that made the print was the "Lord" shoe and not Bruno Magli.. You would be making the same case for the "Lord" shoe..


nettathirty, that's ridiculous. No one can say that the bloody shoe prints were made from a Lord shoe.

The fact is what ever shoe Lord manufactured is irrelevant. The bloody shoe prints were consistent with Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes, size 12 with Silga soles. Simpson wore Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes, size 12 with Silga soles.

If Simpson was shown wearing a pair of Lord shoes with Silga soles in photographs, yes I would be arguing that he left the bloody shoe prints at Bundy and you would probably argue that the killer was wearing Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes. But that wasn't what happened.

Your arguments are pure nonsense and contradicted by all of the known evidence that tells us only three people were at Bundy that night, the two victims and Simpson.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bobaugust



Big Ben, you're quickly losing credibility with these kinds of comments. But then again I'm sorry to say anyone who believes in the fantasy that Juditha Brown called Nicole about 11:00 the night of the murders doesn't have very much credibility to start with.

Bob, you won't rile me with your attempt at scope shifting. Let's finish with your feeble minded rebuttal concerning the U2887 bloody shoe prints before you limp into another unstudied dissertation of what you claim to know about the telephone times and records.

The only thing that you have in your arsenal it appears, is what a bunch of apparently dishonest officers of the court have presented under sworn oath. As far as I am concerned they were simply acting under the color of their authority, a more serious criminal offense if proven, by the way. Don't try to bulldoze me, we are not going to cease and desist our examination of their malfeasance because you say, officer so and so, said this or said that!

I'm not talking about partial prints, the prints that were on the sidewalk tiles at 875 So. Bundy, were apparently adequate enough to allow those that you consider to be so up-right to claim that they were size 12. There were several heel to toe prints on the way to the back gate, and a few fit neatly inside the 11 and-a-half by 11 and-a-half inch square sidewalk tiles. I've seen Simpson's appendages and I can assure you his foot even without the aid of a tennis shoe will not fit inside those tiles. I think that it is highly disengenuous of you to attempt to downplay the evidence that the FBI agent himself states in his book. If he had honestly presented that info at trial about 19 different U2887 possibilities, it would have plundered the prosecution's case. Even the L.A. Times treated the assertion of the discovered 19 shoe brands more seriously than you are, so stop your subjective rambling about something some of these charlatans have said under oath. Give me that much, and I'll be fair and give you a gold star when you make an uncontestable point.........

[limakey]

Wukong,

If you go with the stats, then don't you have to go with the stats regarding Simpson as a suspect? Regarding the amount and type of wounds inflicted on Ron versus Nicole?

I fully agree that stats aren't always the be all and end all, however, they do at least provide a "historical" guideline.

Don't you also have to go with the stats regarding eyewitness testimony?

IMO, I think only a fool would truly believe that anyone is above committing a horrible crime. The only "pass" I might give on this is a parent. To me, I think it may be possible that AC did consider the possibilty that OJ committed this crime and he knew that the evidence of that crime had to be somewhere. For some bizarre reason, people think if you throw something into a lake or a river it will never be found---but how many times has that been proven false.

However, I do believe that tossing evidence into a deep lake or a switft moving river could delay the the process, but it would have or maybe still will surface. What I would love to know is did the police at any time "drag" or search the water for the evidence in this case?

Think about it, the cops have a time frame for how long the murders taken. They have a timeline on how long it took him to get to Rockingham. They have a timeline between when they believe Simpson crashed into a wall and then was seen by two men. They have a timeline on him getting to the airport and boarding the plane. They have an accurate description of his demeanor on the plane. They have an accurate timeline on when he met his driver who was take him to the hotel. They have a timeline of when he left the car, checked into his room and had a record of when and how many times he used his key to get into his room.

There was not a lot of time for him to totally get rid of the evidence. Where do you think he got rid of it? IMO, if he is the killer, then he had to have at the very least had help getting rid of the bloody clothes, shoes and knife.

While I have read your posts regarding the bags, it still makes no sense that the DA's never made the points you have. The DA's made huge mistakes in this area, IMO. I think that if you had to pick the three biggest "mistakes" they made, number three would be the glove demo. Even if a juror believed they didn't fit, I don't think any of them believed the fit of the glove would have stopped him from using them in the murder.

2nd biggest mistake, on "DA's drama Fridays', they left the image with Fuhrman on the stand and Clark presenting the shovel and the big plastic bag. They wanted the jury to belive that he either planned to, after he "tagged" Nicole, bag her and bury her. Well, that just makes no sense if he was already playing "Beat The Clock".

However, the biggest and number 1Bmistake in this area, bringing in that trash can to give the impression he would have dumped in there.

Number 1A was Clark's remarks on why Simpson couldn't have gotten rid of the evidence in LA---he was too famous. He would have been seen if he just tossed the stuff in dumpster. And from what Chris Darden and Marcia Clark said, they believe that he got rid of it before he left LA. That the reason they ignored his baggage is because they knew he didn't bring any of it back with him. Remember, AC and Kardashan checked his luggage for evidence, but the state never did.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben


Bob, you won't rile me with your attempt at scope shifting. Let's finish with your feeble minded rebuttal concerning the U2887 bloody shoe prints before you limp into another unstudied dissertation of what you claim to know about the telephone times and records.

The only thing that you have in your arsenal it appears, is what a bunch of apparently dishonest officers of the court have presented under sworn oath. As far as I am concerned they were simply acting under the color of their authority, a more serious criminal offense if proven, by the way. Don't try to bulldoze me, we are not going to cease and desist our examination of their malfeasance because you say, officer so and so, said this or said that!

I'm not talking about partial prints, the prints that were on the sidewalk tiles at 875 So. Bundy, were apparently adequate enough to allow those that you consider to be so up-right to claim that they were size 12. There were several heel to toe prints on the way to the back gate, and a few fit neatly inside the 11 and-a-half by 11 and-a-half inch square sidewalk tiles. I've seen Simpson's appendages and I can assure you his foot even without the aid of a tennis shoe will not fit inside those tiles.


Big Ben , I have already accepted the fact that there were other shoes that were made with the same Silga sole that Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes had. But that fact is irrelevant to the evidence that proves Simpson was the killer.

The fact is that Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes with Silga soles, size 12 are consistent with making the bloody shoe prints at Bundy.

The fact is that when Simpson was shown the Scull photograph of him wearing those exact kind of shoes he denied it claiming the photo was fake. When the over thirty more authenticated Flammer photographs taken the same day as the Scull photographs became known, they all showed Simpson wearing the same clothing and the same Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes that the Scull photos showed. The Flammer photographs confirmed the authenticity of the Scull photographs and impeached Simpson's lying testimony.

The fact is that all of the relevant physical evidence found at Bundy points to Simpson and only Simpson as the killer. Nothing points to anyone else. Nothing eliminates Simpson. If Simpson had been photographed wearing shoes manufactured by Lord with Silga soles then they would have been the shoes he wore when he committed the murders.

The bloody shoeprints that were further along the walkway were made by the same shoes that made all of the bloody shoe prints. The further Simpson walked down the walkway the less blood was left on the bottom of the shoes to transfer to the walkway, and they eventually faded away about half way down the walkway to the rear gate.

You were looking at partial shoe prints. That's why they were smaller than the larger shoe prints nearer to the blood that Simpson stepped in.

If you can't even figure that out it's no wonder you can't understand that the fantasy 11:00 telephone call was not real, only a mistaken time estimate Lou Brown made when he told Claudine Ratcliffe about his wife calling Nicole after she called the Mezzaluna Restaurant.

Simpson's attorneys were not dishonest about the telephone records. If there was an 11:00 telephone call on the Brown's telephone records showing a call was placed to Nicole and the call lasted long enough for a conversation to have been taken place Simpson's attorneys would have immediately jumped on it since it would all but eliminate Simpson from being the killer. But that never happened because there was no such call. Only a fantasy by uninformed people like Dr. Johnson who can not comprehend reality. Evidently you have the same problem.

That's why not one of Simpson's attorneys from either trial ever supported the frivolous law suit that Dr. Johnson brought nor ever supported the ridiculous false claim that Juditha Brown spoke with Nicole about 11:00 PM. Simpson's criminal defense team knew that claim was false because they had been given the Brown's telephone records and examined them. That's why they made and agreed to the stipulations regarding the real times telephone calls were made on June 12.

There was no 11:00 telephone call. It's all a fantasy only uninformed gullible people believe.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by nettathirty



August,

If you had been "TOLD" the shoe that made the print was the "Lord" shoe and not Bruno Magli.. You would be making the same case for the "Lord" shoe.. Face it August, it's starting to unfold and everyday you are realizing how wrong and mislead you were about the (items) and the murders at 875 Bundy Dr on 12 June 94...

You are getting close, just let it happen!

netta

If the prints at bundy were from a lords shoe, then the proseuction shoe expert that said oj had on bm at buffalo would have lied. since the sloes were the exact same (bm and lodrs)
we don't know which shoe made the prints and neither does bob.

what we do know now is that Bodiaz(sp) witheld the info about the lords sole when he testified which he earned his keep for the prosecution. so why belive any of his other testimnony.imo
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by limakey
Wukong,

If you go with the stats, then don't you have to go with the stats regarding Simpson as a suspect? Regarding the amount and type of wounds inflicted on Ron versus Nicole?

I fully agree that stats aren't always the be all and end all, however, they do at least provide a "historical" guideline.

Don't you also have to go with the stats regarding eyewitness testimony?

IMO, I think only a fool would truly believe that anyone is above committing a horrible crime. The only "pass" I might give on this is a parent. To me, I think it may be possible that AC did consider the possibilty that OJ committed this crime and he knew that the evidence of that crime had to be somewhere. For some bizarre reason, people think if you throw something into a lake or a river it will never be found---but how many times has that been proven false.

However, I do believe that tossing evidence into a deep lake or a switft moving river could delay the the process, but it would have or maybe still will surface. What I would love to know is did the police at any time "drag" or search the water for the evidence in this case?

Think about it, the cops have a time frame for how long the murders taken. They have a timeline on how long it took him to get to Rockingham. They have a timeline between when they believe Simpson crashed into a wall and then was seen by two men. They have a timeline on him getting to the airport and boarding the plane. They have an accurate description of his demeanor on the plane. They have an accurate timeline on when he met his driver who was take him to the hotel. They have a timeline of when he left the car, checked into his room and had a record of when and how many times he used his key to get into his room.

There was not a lot of time for him to totally get rid of the evidence. Where do you think he got rid of it? IMO, if he is the killer, then he had to have at the very least had help getting rid of the bloody clothes, shoes and knife.

While I have read your posts regarding the bags, it still makes no sense that the DA's never made the points you have. The DA's made huge mistakes in this area, IMO. I think that if you had to pick the three biggest "mistakes" they made, number three would be the glove demo. Even if a juror believed they didn't fit, I don't think any of them believed the fit of the glove would have stopped him from using them in the murder.

2nd biggest mistake, on "DA's drama Fridays', they left the image with Fuhrman on the stand and Clark presenting the shovel and the big plastic bag. They wanted the jury to belive that he either planned to, after he "tagged" Nicole, bag her and bury her. Well, that just makes no sense if he was already playing "Beat The Clock".

However, the biggest and number 1Bmistake in this area, bringing in that trash can to give the impression he would have dumped in there.

Number 1A was Clark's remarks on why Simpson couldn't have gotten rid of the evidence in LA---he was too famous. He would have been seen if he just tossed the stuff in dumpster. And from what Chris Darden and Marcia Clark said, they believe that he got rid of it before he left LA. That the reason they ignored his baggage is because they knew he didn't bring any of it back with him. Remember, AC and Kardashan checked his luggage for evidence, but the state never did.

:beer:

[martin II]

bob

did you know that Silga had sold the same special sole they sold to B.M. to Lords BEFORE it was made known yesterday by Wukong/ Ben???

martin II

[limakey]

Martin,

Have you ever read the "Legacey of Deception" by Stephen Singluar? It is a great book and he does talk about Andrea Mozzola and the pressure she was under.

I think both Fung and Mozzola knew what they did and didn't do, however, regardless of what she testified, there is no way I believe Mozzola was mistaken about the coin envelopes.

Maybe that why Goldberg hammered Fung in his book, he didn't want to go after Mozzola? Perhaps he knew Fung wouldn't defense himself but Mozzola would?

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by limakey

I think both Fung and Mozzola knew what they did and didn't do, however, regardless of what she testified, there is no way I believe Mozzola was mistaken about the coin envelopes.




limakey, again what you believe is irrelevant to the factual evidence.

The defense tried to make this minor mistake into something it wasn't trying to deceive the criminal jury into ignoring the blood evidence that proved Simpson guilty. It was a false issue with false insinuations.

Mazzola made a mistaken recollection when she testified in the Griffin Hearing months before the criminal trial about initialing the coin envelopes and the bindles that contained collected blood stains. Mazzola testified that sometime after that hearing she realized her mistake when she saw some of the bindles in serology.

The defense tried to argue that because Mazzola was mistaken about initialing these samples that somehow means they weren't the original bindles when in fact Mazzola testified that they were the original bindles. She testified they didn't have her initials on them but they did have the item numbers she and Fung wrote on them. She explained that it's the item number that's important, not initials. The item numbers are what ties the bindle to the blood stain that was collected and is what individualizes the bindles that were created by the criminalists.

Much ado about nothing. Mazzola's mistaken recollection didn't change one single shred of evidence that proved Simpson was the killer.

bobaugust

[sweet pea 15]

Originally posted by Big Ben


Where do you think that he wants to go with the whole matter relative to his story? My recommendation to him would be to narrow his scope, and determine if he has a cause of action for what was done to him, then gather his supportive coalition and move straight forward, and decisively.

Based upon what little he has shared it may be difficult for him to comprehend or desire to move proactively forward in an objective manner. Never-the-less, he last said that he would continue his presentation at a later date, and I have no reason not to consider him to be a man of his word.

First off, my apologies for thinking you were your brother Mr. Doc Johnson. From a post on the discussion board IAGO from LOLLIE, I am now educated as to who you are. That was really rude of me of not getting my facts straight and I hope you are not offended. I have seen the snippets from your video a few weeks ago and even sent Mario the links to them, so I am aware of your work and impressed with it.

Is there something SPECIFIC you would like to know? I am assuming you are here not to sell your video, but because you are still working with Mr. Simpson in some capacity. He is more than welcome to come to these boards and talk to us; although I don't know what kind of welcome he would receive.....As for myself, I have lots of questions I'd like to ask, but would I get any straight answers? The fact that you don't have Rocky Bateman in your file tells me quite A LOT and I hope that tells you something too.

Are you aware that Dr. Henry Lee has been on a few talk shows promoting William Dear's theory? Well, he's not just promoting it on TV, he's doing it at his lectures also. I'm just wondering, what in the world does Dr. Lee know that has him so CONVINCED that he's taking so much time and energy to make people aware that JASON may have been involved with the murders?

[limakey]

Mr. August,

Reality Check, Andrea Mozzola testified to what she did. The fact of this issue just like some others in this case, their, "Opps, I did it again!" doesn't even pass the laugh test.

[martin II]

sweet pea 15

How about you asking your friend Mario to come to this board
and give us the proof he has about rocky tossing the bag in the lake and the hidden compartment in the limo.

martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



limakey, again what you believe is irrelevant to the factual evidence.

The defense tried to make this minor mistake into something it wasn't trying to deceive the criminal jury into ignoring the blood evidence that proved Simpson guilty. It was a false issue with false insinuations.

Mazzola made a mistaken recollection when she testified in the Griffin Hearing months before the criminal trial about initialing the coin envelopes and the bindles that contained collected blood stains. Mazzola testified that sometime after that hearing she realized her mistake when she saw some of the bindles in serology.

The defense tried to argue that because Mazzola was mistaken about initialing these samples that somehow means they weren't the original bindles when in fact Mazzola testified that they were the original bindles. She testified they didn't have her initials on them but they did have the item numbers she and Fung wrote on them. She explained that it's the item number that's important, not initials. The item numbers are what ties the bindle to the blood stain that was collected and is what individualizes the bindles that were created by the criminalists.

Much ado about nothing. Mazzola's mistaken recollection didn't change one single shred of evidence that proved Simpson was the killer.

bobaugust

bob
if the envelopes presented in the criminal trial were not the ones Mazzola put her name on, it would make a great deal of differance. imo
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


bob
if the envelopes presented in the criminal trial were not the ones Mazzola put her name on, it would make a great deal of differance. imo
martin II


martin II, you're question doesn't make any sense since Mazzola testified she never put her name on the coin envelopes or the bindles.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, you're question doesn't make any sense since Mazzola testified she never put her name on the coin envelopes or the bindles.

bobaugust

bob
so which time was she telling the truth. the first or the second?
martin II

[Big Ben]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bobaugust



Big Ben , I have already accepted the fact that there were other shoes that were made with the same Silga sole that Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes had..

Bob, Glad you've finally reached a milestone when you can admit to accepting a fact from the opposition.

The fact is that the Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes with Silga soles, size 12 are consistent with making the bloody shoe prints at Bundy


"The fact is" the guy that told you they were size 12 Bruno Magli is the same guy that knew about and left out the 19 other U2887 shoe sole possibilities.
I consider him to be an oversight. One of those FBI agents that his former peer, FBI agent Frederic Whitehusrt, was preparing to testify, and accuse of slanting reports in favor of prosecutors.
As you remember the FBI settled for a million dollars with Whitehurst, and part of the agreement was that he shut his mouth and retire peacefully. However,
they got rid of two or three in the Simpson trial, and their Brooks Brothers suits and wingtips looked more spiffier than Bodziak's.

....thirty more Flammer photographs confirmed the authenticity of the Scull photographs and impeached Simpson's testimony

The Flammer photos did no such thing, but possibly insulate the lie of Wm. Bodziak's shoe print myth from discovery before his employment ended at age 46 with the FBI. The Defense photo expert, Robt. Groden, had no opportunity to examine the authenticity of the Flammer photos. The defense objected to the Flammer photos as being phantom discovery, when delivered to them for the first time during cross-examination at trial on Jan. 06, '97. Judge Fugisaki (on the threshhold of retirement himself) overruled. The Defense Expert took no position one way or the other re: the Flammer photos, however, he stood firm on his opinion that the Scull photos were fake after extensive examination.

If you can't even figure that out it's no wonder you can't understand that the fantasy 11:00 PM telephone call was not real

Bob, first you tried to lie and divert people away from the free YouTube.com webclip. Before I engage you in a discussion about the 11:00 PM phone call between Nicole and her mother, I want you to go to YouTube and search Serpents Rising. Watch the "Is Johnnie Cochran For Real" clip and give me your take on why he is telling the judge about their withholding the telephone records from the jury.

I hesitate to debate with you in regard to that subject because you are so far in the dark about that issue, it isn't even funny.

[martin II]

bob

did you know that Silga had sold the same special sole they sold to B.M. to Lords BEFORE it was made known yesterday by Wukong/ Ben???

martin II

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped*Originally posted by Big Ben
[QUOTE][i]The Defense photo expert, Robt. Groden, had no opportunity to examine the authenticity of the Flammer photos. You mean THIS defense photo expert? Triumph of Justice; Petrocelli; p573: "When their initial photo expert went south on them after examining the photo in Buffalo, the defense had to find someone who would call it a fake. They found Robert Groden, a fifty-one-year-old JRK conspiracy buff with no formal training in photography, no college education, no certification by any professional organization; a man whose claim to fame was that he released the Zapruder film, showing the president being shot, to television in 1975. He claimed to be "the consultant" for the House Select Committee on Assassinations, formed to investigate the work of the Warren Commission. However, a bit of prodding revealed that he was a consultant who spent a great deal of his time analyzing one photo of Lee Harvey Oswald holding a gun, and this was eighteen years ago. Fourteen years prior to our trial, he said, the National Enquirer had asked him to authenticate a photograph. They called back once and never again. He wrote books, produced videos, and consulted on films that included footage of the Kennedy assassination. His day job was as a photo-processing machine repairman. The defense was paying him $2,000 a day to testify, and he was perfect for them: he was a man who never met a conspiracy he didn't like."

[nettathirty]

During cross examination of Dr. Lakshamanan, Robert Shapiro asked.. Why are you testifying? When you didn't do the autopsy, and the doctor who did is available to testify..


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9076597094973039275&q=OJ+Conspiracy&hl=en


Copy this url to your address line and then click, OK!!

[sweet pea 15]

Originally posted by martin II
sweet pea 15

How about you asking your friend Mario to come to this board
and give us the proof he has about rocky tossing the bag in the lake and the hidden compartment in the limo.

martin II

Hello martin II! Very nice to meet you.

Mario will never again post on the CTV message boards. IIRC, he did post here right around the time that Bill Wasz was posting here. I think it was because Bill wanted to defend himself against certain accusations and Mario was trying to help defend him. I'm a little fuzzy on the details because this happened before I met Mario. Any hoo..would you believe name calling commenced and reports to the moderator ensued and the thread they were writng on DISAPPEARED?Just your typical day on the O.J. Simpson forum, right?

He will show his proof when he is on the witness stand in a court of law.

I'm on your side, martin. I don't believe O.J. is the murderer. BUT, the only way that he CAN be innocent is that he is covering up for his son. No matter how much you want to deny the story of Rocky Bateman and the missing bag, it is true. And the only person that I know of that O.J. would risk going to jail for is his son.

The only other alternative is that he committed the crime.

JMO

[martin II]

Originally posted by sweet pea 15


Hello martin II! Very nice to meet you.

Mario will never again post on the CTV message boards. IIRC, he did post here right around the time that Bill Wasz was posting here. I think it was because Bill wanted to defend himself against certain accusations and Mario was trying to help defend him. I'm a little fuzzy on the details because this happened before I met Mario. Any hoo..would you believe name calling commenced and reports to the moderator ensued and the thread they were writng on DISAPPEARED?Just your typical day on the O.J. Simpson forum, right?

He will show his proof when he is on the witness stand in a court of law.

I'm on your side, martin. I don't believe O.J. is the murderer. BUT, the only way that he CAN be innocent is that he is covering up for his son. No matter how much you want to deny the story of Rocky Bateman and the missing bag, it is true. And the only person that I know of that O.J. would risk going to jail for is his son.

The only other alternative is that he committed the crime.

JMO

do you believe this board will last 10 minutes if oj were to post here?
martinII

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snipped* You mean THIS defense photo expert? Triumph of Justice; Petrocelli; p573: "When their initial photo expert went south on them after examining the photo in Buffalo, the defense had to find someone who would call it a fake. They found Robert Groden,

fbg, despite the aspersions you cast, Groden's credentials under oath during the civil trial were quite impressive.

He testified that he was the only participant out of the photo experts tested to participate on the House Committee on the Kennedy assassination to receive a score of 100% on the proficiency test that was given by the committee. He testified that due to family financial hardships, I believe after the death of his father, he left school and joined the Army where he completed his H.S. education and one years equivalent of college. I'm certain that there are many talented and successful people that have traveled a similiar path.

He testified to examining the Kennedy death photos and subsequently presenting them to the Dallas medical doctors who initially diagnosed the injuries to Kennedy. According to his testimony they concurred with his suspicians that the photos contradicted the official line. Is that what qualifies him for your apparent disapproval?

[sweet pea 15]

Originally posted by martin II


do you believe this board will last 10 minutes if oj were to post here?
martinII

LOL! No, I don't think it would last ten minutes. But, what an interesting ten minutes it would be! I sure would like to find out!

sweet pea

[martin II]

Originally posted by nettathirty
During cross examination of Dr. Lakshamanan, Robert Shapiro asked.. Why are you testifying? When you didn't do the autopsy, and the doctor who did is available to testify..


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9076597094973039275&q=OJ+Conspiracy&hl=en


Copy this url to your address line and then click, OK!!

The testimnony from Dr Lakshamanan was not from work he did,
he was reading a report from the ME that did the autosy.
Why in the H*** was that.

The Dr. that actually did the autopsy did not even want to testify to what he found.

so now the autopsy report is suspect. gees

i am sure the jury made a mental note of his absence.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by sweet pea 15


LOL! No, I don't think it would last ten minutes. But, what an interesting ten minutes it would be! I sure would like to find out!

sweet pea

there are at least 4 gs here that would disgrace the board with their post.
imo
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by sweet pea 15


LOL! No, I don't think it would last ten minutes. But, what an interesting ten minutes it would be! I sure would like to find out!

sweet pea

sweet pea 15

i read William C Dears book. I foundf it very interesting and a complete investigation. Some here have ignored it completely simply because he offers a possible suspect other than oj. imo
martin II

[fbgweezer]

*Snipped* Originally posted by Big Ben


fbg, despite the aspersions you cast, Groden's credentials under oath during the civil trial were quite impressive.

He testified that he was the only participant out of the photo experts tested to participate on the House Committee on the Kennedy assassination to receive a score of 100% on the proficiency test that was given by the committee. He testified that due to family financial hardships, I believe after the death of his father, he left school and joined the Army where he completed his H.S. education and one years equivalent of college. I'm certain that there are many talented and successful people that have traveled a similiar path.

He testified to examining the Kennedy death photos and subsequently presenting them to the Dallas medical doctors who initially diagnosed the injuries to Kennedy. According to his testimony they concurred with his suspicians that the photos contradicted the official line. Is that what qualifies him for your apparent disapproval? Groden's credentials were a joke and you know it. He was not an expert and had no credentials. I do not believe the judge would have even allowed him to testify as an expert except for the fact that the defense had so much of their case invested in his testimony.

He qualified for my disapproval because he was shown to be a quack and when he was confronted with the Flammer photos, he didn't have enough sense to acknowledge that he'd been wrong.

Jerry Richards proved beyond any reasonable doubt that Groden was wrong.

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by nettathirty
During cross examination of Dr. Lakshamanan, Robert Shapiro asked.. Why are you testifying? When you didn't do the autopsy, and the doctor who did is available to testify..


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9076597094973039275&q=OJ+Conspiracy&hl=en


Copy this url to your address line and then click, OK!!

netta, I'm at a loss as to how to do the above hyperlink thing, and I would really appreciate it if you could post the other Serpents Rising clip google address that has Johnnie Cochran saying "we're not going to show the jury the telephone records" (of Juditha Brown). I know bobaugust is spoiling for a fight about the last time that nicole was known to be alive. The best way for me to speed it up is to start with that clip, since he keeps calling me out.

I thank you, B.B.

[Big Ben]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by fbgweezer
[B]*Snipped* Groden's credentials were a joke and you know it.

I'm sorry, I paid less attention to the civil trial because it was untelevised, I had already predicted a foregone conclusion as a manner of calming the unsettled social waters of America.

I know from the trial transcript that Groden testified under redirect that during the moment of cross-exam is when the Flammer photos were first shown to him. First of all that manner of exhibit intro. (outside of the state of CA.) is highly unusual. Pulling a Perry Mason, no matter how dramatic the alleged evidence, is usually frowned upon in most courts.

Furthermore, I have some suspician due to the same guy that sold the initial photos to the tabloids, was the guy that happened to find the Flammer photos as well, and again sought a deal with the tabloids, i.e. Globe, National Enquirer, etc.

Finally, being bombarded with 30 photos on the witness stand gave no time for extensive examination. I think that his commitment to stand his ground on what he presumed to know based upon his thorough examination was reasonable and not to concur on the voracity of something that he had not examined.

Lack of a college degree does not make one an imbecile, anymore than it guarantees the possessor of one from being an educated fool.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben


"The fact is" the guy that told you they were size 12 Bruno Magli is the same guy that knew about and left out the 19 other U2887 shoe sole possibilities.
I consider him to be an oversight.

The Flammer photos did no such thing, but possibly insulate the lie of Wm. Bodziak's shoe print myth from discovery before his employment ended at age 46 with the FBI. The Defense photo expert, Robt. Groden, had no opportunity to examine the authenticity of the Flammer photos.

Bob, first you tried to lie and divert people away from the free YouTube.com webclip. Before I engage you in a discussion about the 11:00 PM phone call between Nicole and her mother, I want you to go to YouTube and search Serpents Rising. Watch the "Is Johnnie Cochran For Real" clip and give me your take on why he is telling the judge about their withholding the telephone records from the jury.

I hesitate to debate with you in regard to that subject because you are so far in the dark about that issue, it isn't even funny.


Big Ben, your beliefs about what Bodziak said or didn't say about other sole possibilities is irrelevant.

The fact is that Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes with Silga soles, size 12 are consistent with making the bloody shoe prints at Bundy. There has never been any serious question raised about the size of the shoe prints. You're argument that some of the partial shoe prints at Bundy were too small to be left by Simpson is completely ridiculous.

Groden was the only so called expert the defense could find to examine the Scull photographs. His methods and opinions were completely discredited by the plaintiffs expert Gerald Richards who examined the Scull negatives and photographs as well as by the thirty one authenticated Flammer photographs.

MSNBC,
"Gerald Richards was a former top FBI photo analyst who refuted claims of defense expert Robert Groden that the Scull photo of Simpson in Bruno Magli shoes was a fraud. He said the photo wasn't altered in any way, and a first-year photography student would have known it. He explained that the mysterious blue lines on the negative were actually scratches from a camera mechanism and that the photo was not larger than others on the roll."

Triumph of Justice,
"Richards explained that copy machine enlargements such as the ones that Groden had made at Kinko's create distortions that render useless all measurements taken from them. Richards gave simple, obvious explanations to all of the other fictional abnormalities listed by Groden."

Richards examined the Flammer negatives and prints and authenticated the thirty one pictures of Simpson wearing the murder shoes. All of Flammer's photographs showed Simpson wearing the same Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes that he was shown wearing in the Scull photograph. The additional proof that the Flammer photographs were authentic was the fact that one these photographs was published in the Buffalo Bills Report, a monthly publication, seven months before the murders. A copy of that publication was entered into evidence in the civil trial.

Triumph of Justice,
"All the Flammer photos including the negatives, arrived in the courtroom the next week. Groden had plenty of time to examine them and return to the stand to say they were not authentic. Instead he returned to Dealey Plaza.
The defense did not call anyone else to challenge the photos. They wouldn't go near them. The photos just sat there in the courtroom."

The fact that you are now calling me liar only shows how little credibility you have. I've never lied about anything in the Simpson case, I simply state the facts. Facts that contradict your false claims and accusations. I'm sorry but I'm not going to spend any money watching your video clips. If you want to make a case for your false claims on this discussion group I will be happy to respond.

The fact is that the claim that Juditha Brown spoke with Nicole about 11:00 PM the night of the murders is false. It was simply a mistaken time estimate by Lou Brown when he told Claudine Ratcliffe about his wife's last telephone call to Nicole regarding her missing eyeglasses. Evidently neither you nor Dr. Johnson ever read Ratcliffe's statement as to what Lou Brown told her.

Not only was Dr. Johnson's law suit based on false and misinformation he didn't even get the time right when Simpson left for the airport. The fact is that the Brown's telephone records documented the exact times Juditha called the Mezzaluna Restaurant and the last time she called Nicole. The times shown on the telephone records simply support the estimated times testified to by the Mezzaluna Restaurant employees.

Dr. Johnson's claims have no credibility and are contradicted by the known evidence. His law suit was a complete sham. You hesitate to debate this subject because your beliefs are not based on facts or reality, only fantasy.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


sweet pea 15

i read William C Dears book. I foundf it very interesting and a complete investigation. Some here have ignored it completely simply because he offers a possible suspect other than oj. imo
martin II


martin II, if you read Dear's book than you would have read his scenario as to how and what Jason did committing these murders.

Even you with your limited knowledge of the evidence in this case should have been able to see how that scenario fails. It's completely contradicted by the what witnesses testified to and the known evidence found at Bundy.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, if you read Dear's book than you would have read his scenario as to how and what Jason did committing these murders.

Even you with your limited knowledge of the evidence in this case should have been able to see how that scenario fails. It's completely contradicted by the what witnesses testified to and the known evidence found at Bundy.

bobaugust

BOB

Known evidence in the case?

When did you first learn that Silga sold the same special sole they sold to BM to Lords??
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


BOB

Known evidence in the case?

When did you first learn that Silga sold the same special sole they sold to BM to Lords??
martin II


martin II, what does that irrelevant fact have to do with Dear's theory?

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, what does that irrelevant fact have to do with Dear's theory?

bobaugust

bob

I have not indicatred that i was discussing the dear book. i told sweet pea that i had read it in response to his post on the subject.
try not to change the subject.

I just want to know when you because aware that these soles were sold to LORD
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


bob

I have not indicatred that i was discussing the dear book. i told sweet pea that i had read it in response to his post on the subject.
try not to change the subject.

I just want to know when you because aware that these soles were sold to LORD
martin II


martin II, you're the one changing the subject.

You were the one who wrote,

"sweet pea 15

i read William C Dears book. I foundf it very interesting and a complete investigation. Some here have ignored it completely simply because he offers a possible suspect other than oj. imo
martin II"


That's why I brought up Dear's scenario of how Jason supposedly committed these murders. What does that have to do with when I became aware of Silga selling soles to Lord?

No I'm sorry to say that I was never aware of Lord selling shoes in Europe with the same Silga sole as Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes until Big Ben posted it and Wukong confirmed it. It's really no big deal since it's irrelevant to Simpson's lies about wearing Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes.

How about you sticking to the subject. Did you read Dear's scenario or not?

bobaugust

[2L8 4A D8]

Gawd! Not only do they NOT read your posts, but they DON'T even read theirs!

JMO and MOO!!

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, you're the one changing the subject.

You were the one who wrote,

"sweet pea 15

i read William C Dears book. I foundf it very interesting and a complete investigation. Some here have ignored it completely simply because he offers a possible suspect other than oj. imo
martin II"


That's why I brought up Dear's scenario of how Jason supposedly committed these murders. What does that have to do with when I became aware of Silga selling soles to Lord?

No I'm sorry to say that I was never aware of Lord selling shoes in Europe with the same Silga sole as Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes until Big Ben posted it and Wukong confirmed it. It's really no big deal since it's irrelevant to Simpson's lies about wearing Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes.

How about you sticking to the subject. Did you read Dear's scenario or not?

bobaugust

bob

Thanks

i am sure you will not agree but for me this leaves a quesiton as to which shoe could have made the prints at bundy BM OR LORDS
IMO

You really don't know if the distribution was confined to europe since they had 19 brands that they sold in several countries.
imo

Yes i read all of Williams C Dears book. It is on my desk now.
MARTIN ii

[Big Ben]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bobaugust



Big Ben, your beliefs about what Bodziak said or didn't say about other sole possibilities is irrelevant......Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes with Silga soles, size 12 are consistent with making the bloody shoe prints at Bundy.

Bob, you are foolish in asserting such a premise regarding irrelevancy, it certainly has raised the issue of reasonable doubt within the minds of other rational thinkers. I don't need to debate whether Bodziak or other FBI agents would slant evidence, agent Whitehurst's allegations provide that credible indictment along with the dismissal of two FBI analysts in the Simpson trial.

You're a master at verbal gymnastics, exploiting peoples' sense of reason with meaningless words. Again what is the length of a "size 12" anyway. How long is a British "size 12" versus a U.S. "size 12". How long is the so called U2887 Italian "size 12", I'm holding one in my hand as we speak.

"All" of the clear shoeprints in the photos indicate a size 9 to 9 and 1/2 shoe made those prints. We anticipated this debate with those like yourself and thus acquired from SILGA a size 46 U2887 rubber shoe sole. Simpson's foot is 3/4" longer than the U2887 size 46/size 12 that I hold in my hand. Who do you believe is idiotic enough to buy expensive shoes almost an inch shorter than their foot?

A woman posted a free copy of one of the webclips from Serpents Rising last night. But you continue to lie and say I'm trying to charge people money for viewing at Google or YouTube something they can get for free. One will spend money if they choose to purchase the whole 68 minute documentary but that's their choice, and by the way many have done so. You sound so angry that you won't even peak at 1 of 4 two minute clips that you can access for free. You'd see that demonstration in the movie if you weren't so belligerent, and possibly cheap.

I'll address your attack on Dr. Johnson and our efforts regarding the lawsuit re: the Juditha Brown phone records in my next post directed to you.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


bob

Thanks

i am sure you will not agree but for me this leaves a quesiton as to which shoe could have made the prints at bundy BM OR LORDS
IMO

You really don't know if the distribution was confined to europe since they had 19 brands that they sold in several countries.
imo

Yes i read all of Williams C Dears book. It is on my desk now.
MARTIN ii


martin II, I didn't ask you if you read Dear's book. My response to you was because you said you had read Dear's book. I asked you if you read Dear's scenario as to how and what Jason did committing these murders.

Did you read that part in the book?

The fact that the bloody shoe prints could have been made by lord shoes is irrelevant to the lies that Simpson told.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben

You're a master at verbal gymnastics, exploiting peoples' sense of reason with meaningless words. Again what is the length of a "size 12" anyway. How long is a British "size 12" versus a U.S. "size 12". How long is the so called U2887 Italian "size 12", I'm holding one in my hand as we speak.

"All" of the clear shoeprints in the photos indicate a size 9 to 9 and 1/2 shoe made those prints. We anticipated this debate with those like yourself and thus acquired from SILGA a size 46 U2887 rubber shoe sole. Simpson's foot is 3/4" longer than the U2887 size 46/size 12 that I hold in my hand. Who do you believe is idiotic enough to buy expensive shoes almost an inch shorter than their foot?

A woman posted a free copy of one of the webclips from Serpents Rising last night. But you continue to lie and say I'm trying to charge people money for viewing at Google or YouTube something they can get for free.

I'll address your attack on Dr. Johnson and our efforts regarding the lawsuit re: the Juditha Brown phone records in my next post directed to you.


Big Ben, Bodziak never claimed that the only shoe that could have made those bloody shoe prints was a Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoe.

The existence of lords shoes does not change the fact that the bloody shoe prints at Bundy were consistent with being made by Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes, size 12. Nor does it change the fact that Simpson lied about wearing those shoes. The fact is that there isn't one single shred of relevant physical evidence found at Bundy that points to anyone else except three people. The two victims and Simpson. If you think you know of something that points to someone else, please inform us.

Your measuring of a partial shoe print is not a valid method for determining the size of the shoes that made that impression. Bodziak explained the difference between American and European sizes and how he determined that the bloody shoe prints were size 46.

No I didn't lie and I don't continue to lie. My initial response to you was made after I went to your web site and saw you were promoting the false claim about the fictitious 11:00 telephone call and actually charging to see it Even for one dollar it's a rip off. I have seen the free clip on your site and the clip showing Dr. Johnson offering his false opinion about two killers.

The video clip about Dr. Golden not testifying in the criminal trial is irrelevant to the facts in the autopsy reports and Dr. Golden's opinions.

The Prosecution Responds, Hank Goldberg.
"In the criminal trial Brian Kelberg decided to call "Dr. Lakshmanan, Golden's supervisor, who would testify that the approximately thirty mistakes Golden made during the autopsy were all relatively minor in that they could not have affected what Brian referred to as the "big ticket items". Many of these mistakes were failures to properly document the wounds to the bodies. Under Brian's definition, "the big ticket items" were the cause of death, the manner of death, the time of death, and the number of perpetrators."

Dr Golden, Dr. Lakshmanan, and Dr. Spitz all testified that all of the wounds on both victims were consistent with having been made by one single edge knife. All of the wounds are consistent with being made by one right handed killer. There is no evidence of a second killer.

I'm looking forward to your response about the fictitious 11:00 telephone call.

June 19, 1995 Bodziak
MR. BODZIAK: (Witness complies.) Okay. The chart entitled "Shoeprint" comparison on the left side has one of the photographs which I examined which is a bloody shoeprint from the Bundy location. At the crime scene it was marked shoeprint E, the Los Angeles Police Department called it shoeprint E and the FBI--in my report I referred to it as Q107. It is an impression of both the sole and heel. On the right side is another shoeprint which I marked FBI Q68 and which was down in the lower walkway area at the very entrance, inside the gate, and that is of a heel impression. And if whatever impression would have been up here, (Indicating), would have been--if an impression had been laid down up here, it would have been interfered with by the other blood in that area, so you can really only see the heel impression on FBI Q68. In the middle is an approximate two-time enlargement of one of the test impressions I made of the left shoe using the European sole size 46, and attached to shoeprints E and the shoeprint on the right and the left of the chart, are transparencies that are made from the same test impression that is in the center, and this allows, in the comparison and demonstration process of superimposing the features that are left in test impressions of the size 46 and other size soles, over top of the impressions that are examined at the crime scene. And by putting these over these impressions, the precise configuration of the design elements, as I had mentioned before, and how they meet the borders where they are visible in this print, as well as the design element and fragments of the border which were up in this area and made from respective areas of the shoe, correspond, and also FBI Q68, the heel impression, the overlay demonstrates that as well. You can place this overlay back and forth and see the corresponding pattern agrees. Using this method I was able to take the size 42 through 47 shoes of both left and right and I was able to make test impressions through direct physical contact in a transparency form. I was able to place these over the crime scene impressions and determine which size of the European soles made that impression and eliminate the others. And in doing so, with regard to these two, I determined the left size 46 sole positively made the impressions and the 42 through 45 and 47 soles could positively be eliminated.

MR. GOLDBERG: And with respect to the print on the right that says "Shoeprints FBI Q68" even though only a heel of that is visible, you were able to determine that was a 46 European sole?
MR. BODZIAK: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: How?
MR. BODZIAK: Because the heels, like the rest of the shoe, are distinctly different and so no other heel in the other sizes could have made that impression.

MR. GOLDBERG: Were you able to determine whether these shoe prints were made with a shoe that was manufactured on that precise mold that you saw at the Silga factory, the 46 mold?
MR. BODZIAK: Yes, it was--it had to have been made in that mold. There would be no other mold like it. So it was made--the shoe that made the impressions that I have addressed here, Q107 and Q68, were positively shoes that came from the Silga mold size 46.

bobaugust

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust

*SNIPPED*

1. There was no reason for the detectives to request paramedics unless a victim was found.
2. The detectives allowed Arnelle to open the door and enter the house so that she could show them where the housekeepers room was. After entering Simpson's house it was obvious there weren't signs of a struggle anywhere in the house.

bobaugust

August,


These "weak" explanations contradicts LE reasoning for illegally entering the Rockingham property...

[limakey]

Netta,

The problem is LE had every legal right to enter his property and enter any of the structures without a warrant.

Why did they wait so long, Fuhrman was just waiting for a sliver of dawn. There is no way Fuhrman waited hours before going to Rockingham.

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by bobaugust



Big Ben, Bodziak never claimed that the only shoe that could have made those bloody shoe prints was a Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoe.

But you have, Bob, and you got it from somebody (Bodziak). The failure of Bodziak to tell the national and international viewing public which of the other 19 LORD brands were provided the U2887 SILGA soles on the witness stand is undoubtedly the greater point here. In my opinion they should have disqualified him from testifying, as they did his peers, due to the slanting of evidence in favor of prosecutors. He has now, as so too his peers, tarnished the prestige, and creditibility, of one of the world's preeminent investigative agencies.

The existence of lords shoes does not change the fact that the bloody shoe prints at Bundy were consistent with being made by Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes, size 12.

They very well could be consistent with LORD shoes too. Given the smaller dimensions that we've found in the sidewalk tile photos, one could reasonably speculate that they were made by the type of exercise shoe sole favored by Asian martial artists.

It is a subjective thought but if one presumes that the FBI agent was apparently a rehersed liar, which is looking more and more to be the case, then it opens the door to other assailant possibilities.

The video clip about Dr. Golden not testifying in the criminal trial is irrelevant to the facts in the autopsy reports and Dr. Golden's opinions.

There you go again with that word, "irrelevant". I think that this particular word ultimately becomes an arrow pointing to the massive cover-up and malfeasance associated with this case.

It's irrelevant that in the 15 years that Dr. Lakshmanan was the Chief Medical Examiner for L.A. County he has never testified in the place of a doctor who has performed the actual autopsy, except in the OJ Simpson trial?

Its irrelevant that the doctor he testified for has performed over 5, 000 autopsies and testified in over 750 trials, while Dr. Lakshmanan has performed half as many and testifiied in fewer trials?

Its irrelevant that Dr. Golden stated that the knife exit wounds he found on the victims' bodies carried the signature of both a single edged knife and double edged knife, and that two knives could have caused the deaths of the decedents?

It's irrelevant that Dr. Lakshmanan, never performed the autopsies, never examined the bodies, and never went to the murder sight until six months after the murders took place? All of this is irrelevant , Bob?

[Big Ben]

Bobaugust,
you're always dismissing serious irregularities in the Simpson trial as "irrelevant". The issue of what time the Brown family departed the Mezzaluna Restaurant in Brentwood and journeyed down the I-405 (San Diego Freeway) to arrive home in Monarch Bay/Dana Point, Orange County, cannot be easily dismissed as irrelevant.

There are serious inconsistencies concerning what was initially stated in the autopsy reports as to the last time that Nicole was known to be alive. The several amended times of departure from the Mezzaluna Restaurant. The several amended times of the phone call from Juditha, the inconsistency of the stipulated time given to the jury. All of this has raised serious red flags in regard to the time for the Brown's to travel between Brentwood and Dana Point.

Then there is the strange admission regarding the concealing of the phone records from the jury by Johnnie Cochran in his plea to not show the jurors the bloody photos (remember Bob, that's a free webclip on YouTube or Google showing Johnnie C. in action), while apparently unaware that the cameras were still recording.

The point is that these telephone records should have, pursuant to the rules of common law, been examined for their validity by the trier of fact, the jury, in both the criminal and civil trials. These crucial records were never given to the jury for their examination for authenticity, nor, according to the Exhibit Dept. manifest, given to the Custodian of Records for the L.A. County Superior Court. No one but a bunch of slick attorneys have seen those telephone records.

The whole matter is highly unusual. If Nicole was on the phone talking to her mother, Juditha, at 11:00 PM then it gave OJ an iron clad alibi by placing OJ in the back of a chauffeur driven limousine on its way to LAX to catch an 11:45 PM flight to Chicago.

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, I didn't ask you if you read Dear's book. My response to you was because you said you had read Dear's book. I asked you if you read Dear's scenario as to how and what Jason did committing these murders.

Did you read that part in the book?

The fact that the bloody shoe prints could have been made by lord shoes is irrelevant to the lies that Simpson told.

bobaugust

bob
as you know William Dear believes that jason went to nicoles
because he was pissed because he believed she had dissed him
for not comming to his resturant.

nicole came to the door. Angry words were exchanged and nicole slammed the door in his face.

Jason went to his jeep and gor a knife, came back, nocile opened the door and he hit her on the head and knocked her out.

ron arrived and yelled hey hey hey, jason attacked and killed him with the knife and returned to nicole and finished her off.

he then got in his jeep and called oj at rockingham in a panic and told him what he had done.

oj told him to go home , clean up and don't talk to anyone.

oj got in his bronco and went to bundy to see what had happened. he realized that nicole and ron were dead, tracked in the blood, got back in the bronco and returned to rockkingham.

There are many more details and specifics but that is the jist of what he thinks. imo

one must read the book to understand jasons history to undestand how it is possible for him to be in a state of mind that would cause him to do this. imo

He also proves that jasom did not have a alibi for where he was at the time of the murders.imo

martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben


But you have, Bob, and you got it from somebody (Bodziak). The failure of Bodziak to tell the national and international viewing public which of the other 19 LORD brands were provided the U2887 SILGA soles on the witness stand is undoubtedly the greater point here.

They very well could be consistent with LORD shoes too. Given the smaller dimensions that we've found in the sidewalk tile photos, one could reasonably speculate that they were made by the type of exercise shoe sole favored by Asian martial artists.

It is a subjective thought but if one presumes that the FBI agent was apparently a rehersed liar, which is looking more and more to be the case, then it opens the door to other assailant possibilities.

It's irrelevant that in the 15 years that Dr. Lakshmanan was the Chief Medical Examiner for L.A. County he has never testified in the place of a doctor who has performed the actual autopsy, except in the OJ Simpson trial?

Its irrelevant that the doctor he testified for has performed over 5, 000 autopsies and testified in over 750 trials, while Dr. Lakshmanan has performed half as many and testifiied in fewer trials?

Its irrelevant that Dr. Golden stated that the knife exit wounds he found on the victims' bodies carried the signature of both a single edged knife and double edged knife, and that two knives could have caused the deaths of the decedents?

It's irrelevant that Dr. Lakshmanan, never performed the autopsies, never examined the bodies, and never went to the murder sight until six months after the murders took place? All of this is irrelevant , Bob?


Big Ben, no, I have never said that the shoe prints could only have been made by Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes, I've said that they were made by Bruno Magli Lorenzo shoes.

In Bodziak's testimony from the criminal trial that Wukong posted Bodziak referred to lord shoes. Asian martial artists had nothing to do with these murders. That's funny.

June 19, 1995 Bodziak
"The factory has another set of slugs which have the name lord, l-o-r-d, on them and that was the name on the shoe that the national police agency in Japan had identified as part of their reference collection from Europe."

You looked at a photograph of a partial shoe print contained within a known tile size. Your conclusions about the size of the shoe that made those prints are false and have no credibility because whatever method you used was not adequate to support a credible conclusion.

If you read Bodziak's testimony you would have learned that he used test transparencies made from European sizes of the Silga sole to directly compare corresponding patterns of not only the soles but the heels. Bodziak explained that the heels are distinctly different and no other heel in the other sizes could have made that impression except a size 46.

The fact that you presume Bodziak a liar tells us a lot about you. You're just like some other posters here who try to argue that Simpson is innocent by calling any witness who has testified to facts that contradict their arguments, liars. Just like when you called me a liar when you didn't like what I said about your web site. Your accusation was false.

Yes it is irrelevant that Dr. Lakshmanan testified in place of Dr. Golden. Based on the minor errors that Dr. Golden made in his autopsy of the victims the prosecutors needed someone to explain them. A pathologist or forensic pathologist doesn't need to have performed the autopsies or examine the bodies to offer opinions about a written autopsy. Dr. Baden and Dr. Spitz never saw the victims either.

Yes it is irrelevant that two, three, or more knives could have caused all the wounds on both victims. The relevant fact is that Dr. Golden testified that one single edge knife was consistent with causing all of the wounds on both victims. Dr. Lakshmanan and Dr. Spitz agreed. That's the important fact since there isn't one shred of evidence that points to more than one killer.

Yes it is irrelevant that Dr. Lakshmanan never went to the murder scene until after the murders took place. Dr. Golden never went to the murder scene.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben
Bobaugust,
you're always dismissing serious irregularities in the Simpson trial as "irrelevant". The issue of what time the Brown family departed the Mezzaluna Restaurant in Brentwood and journeyed down the I-405 (San Diego Freeway) to arrive home in Monarch Bay/Dana Point, Orange County, cannot be easily dismissed as irrelevant.

There are serious inconsistencies concerning what was initially stated in the autopsy reports as to the last time that Nicole was known to be alive. The several amended times of departure from the Mezzaluna Restaurant. The several amended times of the phone call from Juditha, the inconsistency of the stipulated time given to the jury. All of this has raised serious red flags in regard to the time for the Brown's to travel between Brentwood and Dana Point.

Then there is the strange admission regarding the concealing of the phone records from the jury by Johnnie Cochran in his plea to not show the jurors the bloody photos (remember Bob, that's a free webclip on YouTube or Google showing Johnnie C. in action), while apparently unaware that the cameras were still recording.

The point is that these telephone records should have, pursuant to the rules of common law, been examined for their validity by the trier of fact, the jury, in both the criminal and civil trials. These crucial records were never given to the jury for their examination for authenticity, nor, according to the Exhibit Dept. manifest, given to the Custodian of Records for the L.A. County Superior Court. No one but a bunch of slick attorneys have seen those telephone records.

The whole matter is highly unusual. If Nicole was on the phone talking to her mother, Juditha, at 11:00 PM then it gave OJ an iron clad alibi by placing OJ in the back of a chauffeur driven limousine on its way to LAX to catch an 11:45 PM flight to Chicago.


Big Ben, I agree that the time the Brown's left the Mezzaluna Restaurant to drive home was relevant. The fact is that Juditha Brown testified that they started their drive home about 8:30 PM. As soon as they arrived home, Juditha Brown testified she called the Mezzaluna Restaurant and spoke with Karen Crawford about her missing eyeglasses. That call was made at 9:37 PM

There were no inconsistencies as to the last time Nicole was known to be alive. There was one wrong time estimate Lou Brown gave to Claudine Ratcliffe as to the time Juditha Brown called Nicole about her eyeglasses being held at the restaurant. Juditha made that call to Nicole at 9:40 PM after Karen Crawford, the acting restaurant manager, told her she had found the eyeglasses. Nicole then called the restaurant and spoke with Ron Goldman who told her he would bring the eyeglasses to her on his way out to meet his friends that night.

There was no inconsistency in the times that were agreed to by stipulation. The defense stipulated that the times of 9:37 PM and 9:40 PM were correct and that was the last time Juditha Brown ever spoke with Nicole. Any other time that was not correct was not stipulated to.

No the point is not that the telephone records should have been examined for their validity by the jury. The defense attorneys determined that they were valid and the jury was instructed by the judge "that what the attorneys say during the course of the trial is not evidence; however in a stipulation where the attorney's stipulate and agree to a certain fact, you are to accept that as evidence in the case."

The whole matter is only highly unusual to uninformed people. Nicole was not on the phone talking to her mother at 11:00 PM. and Simpson not only didn't have an iron clad alibi he had no credible alibi for the time of the murders. I have no idea what kind of doctor this Dr. Johnson is but all his opinions and claims about this are based on false and misinformation. I hope if he's a physician who treats patients with medical problems he doesn't use the same kind of methods to come to medical conclusions that he evidently used to come to his outright wrong conclusions about these murders.

bobaugust

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by martin II

<snipped>

nicole came to the door. Angry words were exchanged and nicole slammed the door in his face.

Did Jason have a key to the back gate to let himself in? If he didn't, how did he get in the back gate then? Just curious! I know that the front gate lock was broken and Nicole had to manually go out and unlock it if she was expecting someone.

Jason went to his jeep and gor a knife, came back, nocile opened the door and he hit her on the head and knocked her out.

So, after Jason "hit her on the head and knocked her out" what did he do? Drag her out to the front courtyard where her body was eventually found by LE? IIRC, there was no blood going from the front door out to the front courtyard. Nicole had to have some blood (and I say some) if Jason knocked her out and she dropped to the ground and hit her head!

<snipped>

martin II
The rest of your post is just too bizzare to even comment on. It's dreaming; fantasizing; wishful thinking and downright hoping beyond hope that your Hero and Idol truly is innocent of the crime of double-murder.

I also have no desire to read Mr. Dear's book because I do not believe in the theory that Jason killed Nicole. Didn't happen and it never happened! It's obvious to me and a lot of others who killed Nicole and Ron!

JMO and MOO!!

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


bob
as you know William Dear believes that jason went to nicoles
because he was pissed because he believed she had dissed him
for not comming to his resturant.

nicole came to the door. Angry words were exchanged and nicole slammed the door in his face.

Jason went to his jeep and gor a knife, came back, nocile opened the door and he hit her on the head and knocked her out.

ron arrived and yelled hey hey hey, jason attacked and killed him with the knife and returned to nicole and finished her off.

he then got in his jeep and called oj at rockingham in a panic and told him what he had done.

oj told him to go home , clean up and don't talk to anyone.

oj got in his bronco and went to bundy to see what had happened. he realized that nicole and ron were dead, tracked in the blood, got back in the bronco and returned to rockkingham.

There are many more details and specifics but that is the jist of what he thinks. imo

one must read the book to understand jasons history to undestand how it is possible for him to be in a state of mind that would cause him to do this. imo

He also proves that jasom did not have a alibi for where he was at the time of the murders.imo

martin II


martin II, right and this makes sense to you based on the facts that you are aware of?

Heidstra testified he heard the "Hey, hey, hey" at about 10:40. So Jason kills both victims and then gets in his jeep and calls Simpson. It has to be at least 10:45 by now. Simpson tells him to clean up. Clean up what? He misses seeing the hat and the glove.

After Simpson talked to Jason he evidently changed his clothes and put on Bruno Magli shoes. That would have taken him another couple of minutes. It would not be well after 10:45.

Simpson drives to Rockingham, which takes him about 5 minutes, spends some time looking around, tracking in blood, a couple of more minutes, and he too misses seeing his hat and glove but he manages to get fibers from his clothing on Ron's shirt. He leaves his two small children in the house without checking on them and drives back home, another five minute drive. Now it's close to 11:00.

How does he enter his estate unseen?

And how does Allan Park see Simpson at 10:55?

And how does the other glove get behind Kaelin's room? Did Simpson miss seeing that one too?

And where is one single shred of evidence, including trace evidence that Jason was at Bundy?

Heidstra saw a white jeep like vehicle, not a black jeep, speed away from Bundy about five minutes after he heard the voices.

Shively encountered Simpson's speeding Bronco, not a black jeep, a couple of minutes later and identified Simpson, not Jason.

This entire scenario is contradicted by the known facts and evidence, but at least maybe you're starting to understand that not only can't a scenario of another killer make any sense but that the scenarios you seem to be interested in all have Simpson at Bundy. That's because even this author understands that there is no other way to explain all the evidence that points to Simpson without him having been there that night.

Keep trying, maybe someday that fact will become apparent to you too.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, right and this makes sense to you based on the facts that you are aware of?

Heidstra testified he heard the "Hey, hey, hey" at about 10:40. So Jason kills both victims and then gets in his jeep and calls Simpson. It has to be at least 10:45 by now. Simpson tells him to clean up. Clean up what? He misses seeing the hat and the glove.

After Simpson talked to Jason he evidently changed his clothes and put on Bruno Magli shoes. That would have taken him another couple of minutes. It would not be well after 10:45.

Simpson drives to Rockingham, which takes him about 5 minutes, spends some time looking around, tracking in blood, a couple of more minutes, and he too misses seeing his hat and glove but he manages to get fibers from his clothing on Ron's shirt. He leaves his two small children in the house without checking on them and drives back home, another five minute drive. Now it's close to 11:00.

How does he enter his estate unseen?

And how does Allan Park see Simpson at 10:55?

And how does the other glove get behind Kaelin's room? Did Simpson miss seeing that one too?

And where is one single shred of evidence, including trace evidence that Jason was at Bundy?

Heidstra saw a white jeep like vehicle, not a black jeep, speed away from Bundy about five minutes after he heard the voices.

Shively encountered Simpson's speeding Bronco, not a black jeep, a couple of minutes later and identified Simpson, not Jason.

This entire scenario is contradicted by the known facts and evidence, but at least maybe you're starting to understand that not only can't a scenario of another killer make any sense but that the scenarios you seem to be interested in all have Simpson at Bundy. That's because even this author understands that there is no other way to explain all the evidence that points to Simpson without him having been there that night.

Keep trying, maybe someday that fact will become apparent to you too.

bobaugust

bob
you asked me to post williams Dears theopry of the killing activity.
i did.
If you got a beef with his book, tell it to MR Dear
martin II

[Big Ben]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bobaugust



Big Ben, no, I have never said that the shoe prints could only have been made by Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes, I've said that they were made by Bruno Magli Lorenzo shoes.

Review your post to me yesterday,
10/30-2006 06:21 PM
para 2, lines 1 & 2, " ....the bloody shoe prints at Bundy were consistent with being made by B.M. Loenzo style shoes, size 12". I think, as usual, you are parting straws, Bob.

The fact that you presume Bodziak a liar tells us a lot about you...."

Bodziak did exactly what the court was attempting to prevent when it dismissed the other FBI prosecution witnesses. He slanted the shoe print evidence in favor of the prosecution by failing to disclose publicly the other 19 U2887 shoe sole possibilities. And in my book that makes him a liar.

Yes it is irrelevant that Dr. Lakshmanan testified in place of Dr. Golden...Dr. Baden and Dr. Spitz never saw the victims either.

I doubt that it is "irrelevant" to many onlookers, since Dr. Lakshmanan had never done that before in the 15 years of his career. Pretty convenient that he now decides to do so in the OJ Simpson trial for another medical examiner that had shown proficiency in testifying over 750 times and perfoming over 5000 autopsies to Dr. L's highly questionable 3000.

By the way, Dr. Baden firmly stated after Dr. Johnson's meeting with OJ's civil attorneys, Baker et al in Jan. '97, that he now firmly believed that more than one person perpetrated the fatal attack on the two victims. Check your past L.A. Times for 1997.

Yes it is irrelevant that two, three or more knives could have caused all the wounds on both victims....

I can't go any further with you Bob on the U2887 issue or the Lakshmanan issue. You are beginning to sound retarded as you keep insisting that all of these crucial issues are "irrelevant".

I know that sound minded folk simply don't agree with your points re: "irrelevancies", I've seen their attitudes too often after the lights come on after a screening of our documentary 'Serpents Rising" in many cities around the world.

[socaldiva]

Originally posted by martin II


bob
you asked me to post williams Dears theopry of the killing activity.
i did.
If you got a beef with his book, tell it to MR Dear
martin II


"MR" Dear isn't here, but you are & you seem to be espousing his theories here. ;)

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben


Review your post to me yesterday,
10/30-2006 06:21 PM
para 2, lines 1 & 2, " ....the bloody shoe prints at Bundy were consistent with being made by B.M. Loenzo style shoes, size 12". I think, as usual, you are parting straws, Bob.

Bodziak did exactly what the court was attempting to prevent when it dismissed the other FBI prosecution witnesses. He slanted the shoe print evidence in favor of the prosecution by failing to disclose publicly the other 19 U2887 shoe sole possibilities. And in my book that makes him a liar.

I doubt that it is "irrelevant" to many onlookers, since Dr. Lakshmanan had never done that before in the 15 years of his career. Pretty convenient that he now decides to do so in the OJ Simpson trial for another medical examiner that had shown proficiency in testifying over 750 times and perfoming over 5000 autopsies to Dr. L's highly questionable 3000.

I can't go any further with you Bob on the U2887 issue or the Lakshmanan issue. You are beginning to sound retarded as you keep insisting that all of these crucial issues are "irrelevant".



Big Ben, you quote what I posted to you and it is exactly what I said I told you. I have never claimed that ONLY Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes made the bloody shoe prints only that they were consistent with having made them.

Your belief that Bodziak lied is ridiculous. The facts that Bodziak testified to were not false.

Even before the preliminary hearing the prosecutors realized the deputy medical examiner's report was riddled with errors. They believed they could salvage this by calling another reputable medical examiner to explain all the minor mistakes to the jury. Their first choice was Dr. Werner Spitz, but they couldn't get him so they chose to use Dr. Lakshmanan, Dr. Golden's boss.

You keep avoiding the fact that Dr. Golden testified that ALL of the wounds on BOTH victims was consistent with having been made with ONE single edge knife. That's the relevant fact. If you want to believe that there was more than one killer then your beliefs are pure fantasy unless you can support them with some evidence. You can't so you get upset at me for pointing out how unrealistic and false that belief is.

None of these issues are critical. The claim that there was more than one killer is contradicted by all of the relevant physical evidence and is supported only by imagination.

I agree you can't go any further on the U2877 issue because it's a false issue. It doesn't change the fact that Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes, size 12, are consistent with making the bloody shoe prints at Bundy. The fact that there were some other shoes in this world that also could have left those prints is meaningless since there is no evidence anyone but the two victims and Simpson were at Bundy the night of the murders. Simpson's lying denials that he wore Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes, size 12 confirm his guilt.

Since my using the word "irrelevant" seems to upset you so much, I will refrain from using it in our discussions about the fictitious 11:00 telephone call. Lets hear what you have to say about it.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bobaugust



The fact is that Juditha Brown testified that they started their drive home about 8:30 PM. As soon as they arrived home, Juditha Brown testified she called the Mezzaluna Restaurant ...That call was made at 9:37 PM.

Juditha initially stated to defense investigators that she spoke to her daughter Nicole at 11:00 PM. Shapiro out of disbelief asked the question of her several more times and received the same answer, 11:00 PM. P.33, Shapiro's Book..

1.Her 11:00 PM remarks were consistent with what her husband, Lou Brown, as he first told the coroner's investigator that Nicole "was alive last night at 11:00 PM talking to her mother about glasses" the morning after the murders. Citation within the Nicole Brown Simpson autopsy report.

2. 11:00 PM was consistent with the major highway conditions of 1994 affected by the construction of the HOV lanes along the I-405 corridor, which caused a 1hr 30 min+ commute between the two points. Based upon the highway construction documents received from CalTrans.

3. 11:00 PM was consistent with the initial 9:00 PM time of departure given to Vannatter and Lang, in their police report, by the Mezzaluna Mngr. DeBello on 06/13/94.

4. 11:00 PM is consistent with the Grand Jury Transcripts where Marcia Clark is citing 9:00 PM as the departure time of the Brown party from the Mezzaluna.

5. 11:00 PM was consistent with the waitress Karen Crawford's trial testimony (time of departure about 8:45 PM), DeBello's trial testimony (8:40; 8:45ish).

6. 11:00 PM is consistent with Vanatter and Langs book, estimation of the "90 minute" distance that the Browns lived from the Brentwood restaurant.

7. 11:00 PM is consistent with the 1hr 25 minute Mapquest estimate, AAA estimate, Cal. Highway Patrol estimate, CalTrans estimate, OMIG investigators' estimate of drive time.

8. 11:00 PM is consistent with the NBC reporters covering the civil trial verdict's estimate that "the Browns live about an hour and-a-half to two hours from here" (The Santa Monica Courthouse).

9. 11:00 PM is consistent with Robert Shapiros attempt to enter the initial time stipulation of the call at 10:17 PM on 07/08/94 in Judge K. K. Powell's chamber. This was 7 months before the contested 9:37 PM stipulation was presented at trial.

The time of the call was not a universally known fact, which is the basis for any stipulation.

Our position is that the fight involves the undermining of federally protected guarantees. You cannot deprive the trier of fact/the jury its obligation and right to determine the validity or authenticity of evidence. I'm certainly not impressed with your attempt to sanctify the lawyers with their conduct. They pulled a fast one behind closed doors, now they've been busted.

[Big Ben]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bobaugust



Since my using the word "irrelevant" seems to upset you so much, I will refrain from using it in our discussions....


NO! Absolutely not! Don't stop being the old foolish Uncle Bob becuase of me. I would never deprive you of the use of your vocabulary. I simply was trying to point out that it made you sound ridiculous when trying to explain all of the "irrelevant" anomalies that keep popping up in this case.

Don't accuse me of being mad at you either, usually I'm eating a piece of cherry pie when you start posting, and I don't worry about indigestion. Believe me, your regurgitations of second hand statements are too light weight for that.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben

Juditha initially stated to defense investigators that she spoke to her daughter Nicole at 11:00 PM. Shapiro out of disbelief asked the question of her several more times and received the same answer, 11:00 PM. P.33, Shapiro's Book..

1.Her 11:00 PM remarks were consistent with what her husband, Lou Brown, as he first told the coroner's investigator that Nicole "was alive last night at 11:00 PM talking to her mother about glasses" the morning after the murders. Citation within the Nicole Brown Simpson autopsy report.

2. 11:00 PM was consistent with the major highway conditions of 1994 affected by the construction of the HOV lanes along the I-405 corridor, which caused a 1hr 30 min+ commute between the two points. Based upon the highway construction documents received from CalTrans.

3. 11:00 PM was consistent with the initial 9:00 PM time of departure given to Vannatter and Lang, in their police report, by the Mezzaluna Mngr. DeBello on 06/13/94.

4. 11:00 PM is consistent with the Grand Jury Transcripts where Marcia Clark is citing 9:00 PM as the departure time of the Brown party from the Mezzaluna.

5. 11:00 PM was consistent with the waitress Karen Crawford's trial testimony (time of departure about 8:45 PM), DeBello's trial testimony (8:40; 8:45ish).

6. 11:00 PM is consistent with Vanatter and Langs book, estimation of the "90 minute" distance that the Browns lived from the Brentwood restaurant.

7. 11:00 PM is consistent with the 1hr 25 minute Mapquest estimate, AAA estimate, Cal. Highway Patrol estimate, CalTrans estimate, OMIG investigators' estimate of drive time.

8. 11:00 PM is consistent with the NBC reporters covering the civil trial verdict's estimate that "the Browns live about an hour and-a-half to two hours from here" (The Santa Monica Courthouse).

9. 11:00 PM is consistent with Robert Shapiros attempt to enter the initial time stipulation of the call at 10:17 PM on 07/08/94 in Judge K. K. Powell's chamber. This was 7 months before the contested 9:37 PM stipulation was presented at trial.

The time of the call was not a universally known fact, which is the basis for any stipulation.

Our position is that the fight involves the undermining of federally protected guarantees. You cannot deprive the trier of fact/the jury its obligation and right to determine the validity or authenticity of evidence. I'm certainly not impressed with your attempt to sanctify the lawyers with their conduct. They pulled a fast one behind closed doors, now they've been busted.


Big Ben, what the attorneys say in this case is not evidence. The 11:00 PM claim is based entirely on false and misinformation, contradicted by the facts and evidence witnesses testified to and contradicted by the Brown's telephone records that were stipulated to by Simpson's defense attorneys.

1. Both Juditha Brown and Lou Brown originally gave mistaken time estimates after learning of their daughters death. That's understandable based on the tragedy that experienced. They later realized their error and when Juditha Brown testified she corrected the mistake.

All you have to do is read Claudine Ratcliffe's report to know that the telephone call Lou Brown told Ratcliffe about was when Juditha Brown called Nicole after speaking with Karen Crawford at the Mezzaluna Restaurant about her missing eyeglasses. It's obvious that the 11:00 PM time estimate is incorrect since that conversation happened in a 9:40 PM telephone call, not 11:00.

"The decedent 94-05136 was last known to be alive at 2300 Hrs. speaking to her mother on the telephone. Her mother left her eyeglasses at a restaurant that evening and the decedent reportedly advised her mother that she would ask if an employee could bring them to her residence."
Claudine Ratcliffe

2. You are wrong about the time it took the Brown's to drive from Brentwood to their home in Orange County. The Brown's never said they were delayed by any construction. Many people familiar with that area duplicated the Brown's drive and all found that it could easily be done in about one hour.

3. John DeBello testified in the grand jury on June 21, 1994 that the Brown's left the restaurant about 8:30, 8:40 PM. Once again only an estimated time, not a real time.

4., 5. What Marcia Clark said is not evidence. At the time of the grand jury Clark was unaware of the Brown's telephone records. Both Crawford and Debello only estimated the time the Brown's left. There was no reason for them to have remembered the exact time since it was of no concern of theirs at the time. DeBello testified that "it was about 8:30, 8:40 PM." Crawford testified that it was "around 8:30 or 9. I'm not positive."

Juditha Brown testified,
December 6, 1996
Yes. I -- we looked for my glasses, still, I know, because I didn't have the glasses in the restaurant. So we looked in the jeep and we didn't see them. And it was 8:30 by that time and the children had to go to bed, so we said, well, let's go; I'll call.

6. I don't recall Vannatter and Lange writing that but again it's not evidence. What they did write in their book in the timeline was:
9:37 PM Juditha Brown called the Mezzaluna restaurant.
9:40 PM Juditha Brown reached her daughter to tell her about her glasses. They talked for two minutes.
9:45 PM Nicole Brown the called the restaurant and spoke with her friend, Ron Goldman. Goldman offered to drop off the glasses after his shift.

7. The Mapquest and other estimates you are referring to are based on driving posted speed limits. In reality people in California normally drive well over posted speed limits. Many people have duplicated that drive and found that by driving the speed normal traffic travels that drive can be made in one hour.

8. What NBC reporters said is not evidence.

9. There was no 10:17 PM telephone call. Shapiro was mistaken. When Shapiro offered his stipulation Clark said she didn't remember that time that she would have to check it out but if that's what the telephone records say then she would stipulate to it. Shapiro never again offered that stipulation because it wasn't on the telephone records.

No one pulled a fast one. Simpson's attorneys aren't as stupid as you evidently think they are. If there was any validity to what you want to believe they would have been all over it. Not only did they never make the claims you are making they offered stipulations regarding the times that were on the actual telephone records and agreed to other stipulations that the prosecution offered regarding the times of telephone calls shown on the actual telephone records.

Simpson too was was aware of the Brown's telephone records when they were given to the defense to examine and check out. The only one who can't comprehend the reality of the facts in this case are you and Dr. Johnson. That's why not one of Simpson's defense attorneys from either trial ever supported the frivolous law suit and the fictitious 11:00 time. You and Dr. Johnson are the ones tying to pull a fast one and your claims have been thoroughly discredited. They are completely false. You're busted.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben


NO! Absolutely not! Don't stop being the old foolish Uncle Bob becuase of me. I would never deprive you of the use of your vocabulary. I simply was trying to point out that it made you sound ridiculous when trying to explain all of the "irrelevant" anomalies that keep popping up in this case.

Don't accuse me of being mad at you either, usually I'm eating a piece of cherry pie when you start posting, and I don't worry about indigestion. Believe me, your regurgitations of second hand statements are too light weight for that.


Big Ben, funny. Thank you I will continue using the word "irrelevant" about things that are not relevant to the murders or who the killer was. Or I might just use the word "meaningless." when it's appropriate.

I didn't accuse you of being mad, I said you were obviously upset since you resorted to calling me names.

My statements are statements of fact, supported by what witnesses testified to or the evidence in this case. The fact is that all of the relevant physical evidence found at Bundy points to Simpson and only Simpson as the killer. Nothing points to anyone else. Nothing eliminates Simpson.

Regurgitate that a few times and maybe it might start to make sense to you as to the reality of what it means.

bobaugust

[limakey]

Big Ben,

While I agree with you about the Browns' telephone records, all of the Browns' telephone records are important, but it could be for a totally different reason.

If the Browns' and Nicole's phone records show that they last spoke to each other, at what, 9:40 p.m.---what does that really mean---that no one else could have called after that time and talked to Nicole? That Nicole could not have called anyone after this time?

We know Faye Resnick lied about the phone call, she lied about the time, then was smart enought to correct herself. However, if you think about it, she was rehab, how many days? Three? How was she even able to get to a phone---unless she went to great lengths to speak to Nicole that night.

While Faye describes the phone call as being upbeat, all about Nicole and her future without OJ, I find that hard to believe. How many people in rehab are that "upbeat" enought to even listen to their friend talk about issues that have nothing to do with them. In other words, if Faye got to a phone, there was no way Faye would even want to hear about Nicole's day, her body would be in detoxing and we know that Faye fought against going into rehab. Plus, this is the only time she went into a security that was secure--that was on thing she was promised by the intervention squad of friends. Why did she say she would go only if it was secure?

Also, we have a Dr. Ameli claiming she called Nicole that night. Nicole was upset, knew OJ was so made at her and that tonight was going to be the night he would come for her. Dr. Ameli suggested a friend to come over and sit with her. Now, to me, that sounds like a "witness" who had her ducks in a row to answer questions, any question about the murders, including why a second person was there.

I do not believe that Nicole, if she truly feared for her life that night by OJ Simpson would purposely lead another human being into this. In other words, I can't see Nicole taking a chance on another person's life because she knew her's was going to end that night.

Do you know any thing about this? Dr. Ameli? Faye--which by the way, Faye went into court and had the phone records surpressed. Saying because it was public phone they didn't have to release them.

[martin II]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8

The rest of your post is just too bizzare to even comment on. It's dreaming; fantasizing; wishful thinking and downright hoping beyond hope that your Hero and Idol truly is innocent of the crime of double-murder.

I also have no desire to read Mr. Dear's book because I do not believe in the theory that Jason killed Nicole. Didn't happen and it never happened! It's obvious to me and a lot of others who killed Nicole and Ron!

JMO and MOO!! [/B]

any comments about mr dears theory should be directed at him. not me. sure he would be pleased to support his theory.imo
martin II

[socaldiva]

Originally posted by martin II


any comments about mr dears theory should be directed at him. not me. sure he would be pleased to support his theory.imo
martin II

You are the person bringing his theories to this board, not Mr. Dear.

[Big Ben]

Originally posted by bobaugust



Big Ben, what the attorneys say in this case is not evidence.

Bob, I remember Judge Ito telling the jury the same thing. Then continuing to say, ...what the attorneys say in this case is not evidence, but when both attorneys stipulate to a fact, you must accept that as evidence in the trial.

Initially awed by the judge's majesty during the early moments in the trial, the jury after hearing all of the witnesses say 8:45 PM departure did not become suspicious about an alleged 9:37 PM phone call, the telephone records shot right past the jury with no examination, or protest whatsoever.

In regard to the wording of California law relative to such a stipulation, my analogy is: Had Chicken Little appeared in the back room with the lawyers and proclaimed that the 'Sky was falling' and the attorneys decided to stipulate to it as fact, the jury would have no choice but to accept the stipulation as fact, that the sky was indeed falling.

California, along with several southern states, opted not to participate in the National Conference for the creation of a Uniform Rules ofEvidence..1953-1965.

I'm afraid this malformed caricature of due process has become the end result of that predetermined will not to participate.

Those phone records were, and still are a source of deep division, a major prerequisite for them to have been presented to the trier of fact/jury. That did not happen and as a result the nation, I believe, was intentionally thrust into this deeply partisan empass.

I have less of a concern for Simpson than I do for the malicious assault upon our system's guarantee of due process.
This excersise has only seemed to benefit someone's warped idea of a prototype on how to divide and conquer a nation.

Big Ben

[Big Ben]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by limakey
Big Ben,



If the Browns' and Nicole's phone records show that they last spoke to each other, at what, 9:40 p.m.---what does that really mean---that no one else could have called after that time and talked to Nicole? That Nicole could not have called anyone after this time?

No limakey, it does not mean that no one could not have called Nicole after 9:40 PM. The importance of 9:40 PM is that it allowed certain people to create a time window in which Simpson could have committed murder.

All of the times earlier than 11:00 PM were intended to create a frame of time that OJ would have been available to kill the victims.

However if Nicole was talking to her mother, at 11:00 PM, which is what was stated by her mother to investigators and her father's statement in the autopsy report of Nicole, then OJ could not have killed her because he was being chauffeured to LAX in a limousine.

The construction zones that existed during the expansion of the I-405 from 3 lanes to a 4th HOV lane slowed traffic to a crawl in June of 1994 through that zone. Therefore when the mother said that I called Nicole at approximately 11:00 PM when I got home" {pg. 33 Search For Justice, Robt. Shapiro, author} we believe that it was accurate considering that they left the Mezzaluna Restaurant between 8:30 and 9:00 PM.

9:40 PM was made to appear to be important only to keep it from the jury's mind that OJ was on a plane; in the airport; or back of a limo, if his wife was on the phone at 11:00 PM. That is why we believe that the phone records never reached the juries. That is why 9:37 PM and 9:40 PM were entered by stipulation, that is why the phone records are not on the manifest of the exhibit dept., that is why prosecutors would ask a judge to make them the personal property of a deputy DA.

We believe that the existence of the 11:00 PM phone records were behind the meaning of Johnnie C. stating that "We don't need to show the jury the bloody photographs after all we're not going to show them other evidence in this case, we're not going to show them the telephone records".

I am deeply concerned about the cover-up of Faye, given all of her problems and background. However, Ron, had some deep issues too, that very well could have made him the prime target, and not Nicole. Nicole simply was swimming in bad water, with some very bad characters around her that law enforcement knew about.

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by martin II

any comments about mr dears theory should be directed at him. not me. sure he would be pleased to support his theory.imo
martin II

I don't support Mr. Dear's theory, so why would I contact him just so that "he would be pleased to support his theory?" Duh!

JMO and MOO!!

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally quoted by 2L8 4A D8

<snipped>

nicole came to the door. Angry words were exchanged and nicole slammed the door in his face.

Did Jason have a key to the back gate to let himself in? If he didn't, how did he get in the back gate then? Just curious! I know that the front gate lock was broken and Nicole had to manually go out and unlock it if she was expecting someone.

Jason went to his jeep and gor a knife, came back, nocile opened the door and he hit her on the head and knocked her out.

So, after Jason "hit her on the head and knocked her out" what did he do? Drag her out to the front courtyard where her body was eventually found by LE? IIRC, there was no blood going from the front door out to the front courtyard. Nicole had to have some blood (and I say some) if Jason knocked her out and she dropped to the ground and hit her head!

<snipped>

JMO and MOO!!

martin II
Well, since I didn't receive an answer to my questions re: the above post, I will just consider the source and figure that MY theories are correct. Thank you!

JMO and MOO!!

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by Big Ben

Bob, I remember Judge Ito telling the jury the same thing. Then continuing to say, ...what the attorneys say in this case is not evidence, but when both attorneys stipulate to a fact, you must accept that as evidence in the trial.

Initially awed by the judge's majesty during the early moments in the trial, the jury after hearing all of the witnesses say 8:45 PM departure did not become suspicious about an alleged 9:37 PM phone call, the telephone records shot right past the jury with no examination, or protest whatsoever.

In regard to the wording of California law relative to such a stipulation, my analogy is: Had Chicken Little appeared in the back room with the lawyers and proclaimed that the 'Sky was falling' and the attorneys decided to stipulate to it as fact, the jury would have no choice but to accept the stipulation as fact, that the sky was indeed falling.

California, along with several southern states, opted not to participate in the National Conference for the creation of a Uniform Rules ofEvidence..1953-1965.

I'm afraid this malformed caricature of due process has become the end result of that predetermined will not to participate.

Those phone records were, and still are a source of deep division, a major prerequisite for them to have been presented to the trier of fact/jury. That did not happen and as a result the nation, I believe, was intentionally thrust into this deeply partisan empass.

I have less of a concern for Simpson than I do for the malicious assault upon our system's guarantee of due process.
This excersise has only seemed to benefit someone's warped idea of a prototype on how to divide and conquer a nation.

Big Ben




Big Ben, an estimated time given by someone not concerned with what the Brown's did doesn't tell us when the Brown's started their drive back home.

Juditha Brown had no reason to lie about anything in this case. She testified honestly and truthfully. She said that after leaving the restaurant they searched the car for her missing eyeglasses. She specifically noted the time because she had children with her that had to get home. It was 8:30 PM when they stopped looking for her eyeglasses and started the drive back home, not 8:45 PM.

Simpson's attorneys were not criminals. They were doing everything they possibly could to get Simpson off dreaming up anything and everything no matter how unrealistic or unlikely to convince the jury. But they operated within the law they didn't break it. The prosecution turned the Brown's telephone records over to them. They examined them and most likely checked with GTE as to their authenticity. They knew the times of telephone calls shown on those records were correct.

Juditha Brown testified that she called the Mezzaluna restaurant as soon as she got home. Her telephone records document that call at 9:37 PM. Simpson's attorneys understood that confirmed Karen Crawford's estimated time that she talked to Juditha Brown.

Juditha Brown testified that after speaking with Crawford she called Nicole and told her about the eyeglasses being held for her. That was the last time Juditha Brown ever spoke with Nicole. Telephone records document that call at 9:40 PM.

Karen Crawford testified that about five minutes after speaking with Juditha Brown, Nicole called the restaurant and spoke with Ron Goldman about the eyeglasses.

Simpson's attorneys understood that the documented calls confirmed everything Karen Crawford testified to. That's why Shapiro and Cochran agreed to stipulations to those times and the fact that during that 9:40 PM telephone was the last time Juditha Brown ever spoke with Nicole.

There was another stipulation that some telephone numbers shown on those records that were not relevant to the case be redacted. Both the prosecution and the defense agreed.

There were other stipulations made in this case as there are in all cases. Your example of what you think the law would allow in a stipulation is not realistic. A stipulation is an agreement to facts by two sides that are opposed to each other. If the defense had any doubt or suspicions at all that the times shown on the Brown's telephone records were not correct they would never have stipulated to them. That's reality.

The fact is that there never was an 11:00 PM telephone call, only a mistaken time estimate by two parents who were grieving for their murdered daughter. Simpson's attorneys understood this but you still can't seem to admit it. All of your rhetoric about what the jurors should have seen is only an excuse by you because you just can't admit that you're wrong. Evidently you believe the investment in your web site and any possible monetary gain you may receive from it is more important than the truth. It seems you're lack of integrity doesn't bother you at all.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8

Well, since I didn't receive an answer to my questions re: the above post, I will just consider the source and figure that MY theories are correct. Thank you!

JMO and MOO!!

2l
you need to read my post agains and try doing so slowly.

i made it clear that i was giving a jist of the theory to bob.

if you are interested in the details i suggest you try amazone.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8


I don't support Mr. Dear's theory, so why would I contact him just so that "he would be pleased to support his theory?" Duh!

JMO and MOO!!

2l
thats just great so i should not expect any post from you on this subject.
if you want specific answers the best source is the author
or the book.
martin II

[tazzybaby]

Big Ben,

Are you just dismissing the Mezzaluna employees who testified what time the phone call came in and what time Ron left? That proves the time of the phone call was not 11:00.

:shrug:

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by martin II

2l
you need to read my post agains and try doing so slowly.

i made it clear that i was giving a jist of the theory to bob.

if you are interested in the details i suggest you try amazone.
martin II

You put out a post. I asked questions re: that post. You didn't answer my questions. I don't care if your post was to Bob or not. I also don't care if they were Mr. Dear's theories or not. You obviously believe they are correct or you wouldn't post them. As usual, your typical cop out is to tell US to go and talk to Mr. Dear or go to amazone, whatever the hail that is. You don't even have the b@!!$ to stand behind Mr. Dear and his theories. Thus, I suggest that you quit quoting his theories. Mr. Dear said this. Mr. Dear said that. So freaking what and So much for Mr. Dear's theories!

If you can't or won't answer questions re: your posts, then don't post! It's that simple. Again, I will just consider the source that you don't and won't have the answers to my questions.

:hat: Duh!

JMO and MOO!!

[martin II]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8


You put out a post. I asked questions re: that post. You didn't answer my questions. I don't care if your post was to Bob or not. I also don't care if they were Mr. Dear's theories or not. You obviously believe they are correct or you wouldn't post them. As usual, your typical cop out is to tell US to go and talk to Mr. Dear or go to amazone, whatever the hail that is. You don't even have the b@!!$ to stand behind Mr. Dear and his theories. Thus, I suggest that you quit quoting his theories. Mr. Dear said this. Mr. Dear said that. So freaking what and So much for Mr. Dear's theories!

If you can't or won't answer questions re: your posts, then don't post! It's that simple. Again, I will just consider the source that you don't and won't have the answers to my questions.

:hat: Duh!

JMO and MOO!!

i agree with the part where you say you will not ask me any questions again.
martinII

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by martin II

i agree with the part where you say you will not ask me any questions again.
martinII
Ah, I don't see anywhere in my post that says that I "will not ask you any questions again." Again, wishful thinking on YOUR part. I will post to you if I want to. I just won't expect to get any logical or common sense answers because you don't even have these two attributes.

JMO and MOO!!
Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8

You put out a post. I asked questions re: that post. You didn't answer my questions. I don't care if your post was to Bob or not. I also don't care if they were Mr. Dear's theories or not. You obviously believe they are correct or you wouldn't post them. As usual, your typical cop out is to tell US to go and talk to Mr. Dear or go to amazone, whatever the hail that is. You don't even have the b@!!$ to stand behind Mr. Dear and his theories. Thus, I suggest that you quit quoting his theories. Mr. Dear said this. Mr. Dear said that. So freaking what and So much for Mr. Dear's theories!

If you can't or won't answer questions re: your posts, then don't post! It's that simple. Again, I will just consider the source that you don't and won't have the answers to my questions.

Duh!

JMO and MOO!!

Old Post 11-01-2006 11:52 AM